Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

He’s not punishing someone in need. Nobody has a right to someone else’s organs, however life-saving they may be. The fundamental idea of a ”donation“ is that it’s voluntary.


The Right to Health is an inalienable human right.

I suppose "organ donation" might be better phrased as "organ recovery" then?

You can't use it anymore, and it would go to waste... Hence it should be recovered. People might not have a right to have your own organs specifically, but it's society's duty to implement organ recovery.

Otherwise, we wouldn't be able to provide for everyone's human rights.


This thought process is why the idea of positive rights is incoherent.


The right to health is completely made up; bacteria, viruses and cancer don't honor this right and doctors and drug makers don't work for free, so this right and a few similar ones (right to Internet, for example) are just pulled out of someone's rear parts.

That being said, it cannot be used as an argument in a civilized discussion between adults.


So are all the other rights.

> Death: Yes. As practice, you have to start out learning to believe the little lies.

> Susan: So we can believe the big ones?

> Death: Yes. Justice, mercy, duty. That sort of thing.

> Susan: They're not the same at all!

> Death: You think so? Then take the universe and grind it down to the finest powder and sieve it through the finest sieve and THEN show me one atom of justice, one molecule of mercy. And yet... you try to act as if there is some ideal order in the world. As if there is some... some rightness in the universe by which it may be judged.

https://www.quotes.net/mquote/1016567


I think it's a bit much to voluntarily withhold lifesaving treatment for someone in need because you're angry that your government made a bad policy choice.


I respect your opinion but I don’t want my family to be pressurised with that view at the time of my death.

It’s one thing to ask if they will help someone in need and another to say “we’re doing this are you going to stop us?”

By opting out, when I was previously on the donor list, I can spare them that.

You might say it will be handled more tactfully but there’s historical precedent that it won’t be.

This is an unpopular opinion but I feel compelled to express it; I think this law is wrong.

There should have been more debate and finesse used in the drafting of it.


I don't know why my family should have a say either. I guess it's pressuring them in a way, but dying generally puts pressure on one's family regardless.

Cremated, buried, put out to sea on a flaming raft, whatever. Who cares if the corpse I left behind is short an eyeball, a couple tendons, and a liver?

More importantly, if those body parts can be used to save someone else's life, I don't believe they should even have the right to care. People who are still alive and need an organ to survive are more important than whatever squeamishness and perception of agency my family might have.

The concern that doctors could theoretically let people die more easily to get their organs is another matter entirely, but that's not the topic in this sub-thread.


Thank you that’s far more eloquent than I could have put it.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: