Status determines chance of getting a transplant

We've talked before about the travesty of giving a set of adult lungs to a child whose parents whined the loudest (also here).

This article asks if that's the future we can expect: organ donations going to the people who can generate the most public support. It wouldn't surprise me; funding for medical care already operates that way in some countries (here's a discussion on that) and a well-timed sob story has been shown to reverse rational policies.

So fuck those who don't have a compelling story (like the CF), and fuck those introverts who can't mobalize an online mob, right? Let everything go to manipulative grifters who are most successful at making a convincing argument. Sounds like a step back for humanity, and one of the many reasons I am not on organ donor (uterus transplants are another reason).

Quote

When you ask physicians whether the current living donor system is fair, a look of discomfort often flickers across their faces. They pause. They speak with care. “Well … I don’t know if it’s fair or not,” says Atul Humar. “But clearly there are more benefits than downsides.”

Because everybody runs on emotions and care more about perception than logic and rationality. Medicine is one of those industries where people need to channel their inner Vulcan and not let emotion take over and motivate important decisions and policies. The demand for organs already vastly outweighs the supply; we can't afford to let a sob story determine who gets to jump the line and get an organ. The kid is dying a very early death no matter what; the new lungs will get overtaken by her disease. All the transplant did was postpone the inevitable for a couple more years. Instead of wasting organs on her and forcing her to stay in a hospital for so much longer, take the kid to Disney World or the Wonderful Wizarding World of Harry Potter or wherever she wants to go, give her some happiness and fun, and let her die peacefully.

------------------------------------------------------------
"Why children take so long to grow? They eat and drink like pig and give nothing back. Must find way to accelerate process..."
- Dr. Yi Suchong, Bioshock

"Society does not need more children; but it does need more loved children. Quite literally, we cannot afford unloved children - but we pay heavily for them every day. There should not be the slightest communal concern when a woman elects to destroy the life of her thousandth-of-an-ounce embryo. But all society should rise up in alarm when it hears that a baby that is not wanted is about to be born."
- Garrett Hardin

"I feel like there's a message involved here somehow, but then I couldn't stop laughing at all the plotholes, like the part when North Korea has food."
- Youtube commentor referring to a North Korean cartoon.

"Reality is a bitch when it slowly crawls out of your vagina and shits in your lap."
- Reddit comment

"Bitch wants a baby, so we're gonna fuck now. #bareback"
- Cambion

Oh whatever. Abortion doctors are crimestoppers."
- Miss Hannigan

Quote
paragon schnitzophonic
Because everybody runs on emotions and care more about perception than logic and rationality. Medicine is one of those industries where people need to channel their inner Vulcan and not let emotion take over and motivate important decisions and policies.

I seem to recall that there was a study that showed that perception of unfairness in the system reduces the number of people willing to be organ donors. Wouldn't surprise me.

But this is not a rational world. Breeders supply ample evidence that most people seem to function on emotion and give little thought to logic.

Quote
yurble

Quote
paragon schnitzophonic
Because everybody runs on emotions and care more about perception than logic and rationality. Medicine is one of those industries where people need to channel their inner Vulcan and not let emotion take over and motivate important decisions and policies.

I seem to recall that there was a study that showed that perception of unfairness in the system reduces the number of people willing to be organ donors. Wouldn't surprise me.

But this is not a rational world. Breeders supply ample evidence that most people seem to function on emotion and give little thought to logic.

This is interesting. A number of countries are begining to craft "presumed consent" laws. You don't opt-in, you have to opt-out or - snip - whatever is still healthy when you die goes into the pool. Chile is portrayed in the article as being a model for other countries in making it rather bureacractic to not become a donor, also coming up with decrees that state "you gotta be willing to give, to get." Supposedly, this would repress the fear that people will get subpar care if critically injured or ill

Quote

One can speculate that consenting to the postmortem removal of body parts could generate significant costs or risk for the consenters since they might receive suboptimal care if hospitalized in a critical condition. However, hospital staff do not have any financial incentives to notify organ procurement agencies of potential donors under their care. Since presumed consent makes most individuals potential donors, the physicians have no reason to make distinctions between patients

I'm not sure if all that prevents the maudlin factor. The WHO article only addresses tactics to increase the pool of donors, not establish fair boundaries for who receives organs.