A bill sponsored by Rep. Dan Pabon and Sen. Lucia Guzman, both of Denver, that would make organ donation something Coloradans would have to “opt-out” of has created some controversy. As The Huffington Post Denver reports:
Colorado’s proposal, introduced in the Legislature last week, would change the process for renewing driver’s licenses and ID cards so applicants are assumed to be organ and tissue donors unless they initial a statement that says they want to opt out.
The “presumed consent” system is common in Europe and is credited with dramatically raising donation rates.
Not surprisingly, as with many bills laden with good intentions, the devil is always in the details. KDVR’s Tammy Vigil explains why even some organ donors and organ donation advocates are upset:
“We have a crisis of over 2,000 people in Colorado and over 105,000 nationally on waiting lists. So people are exploring other ways donations can increase,” says Sue Dunn, CEO of Donor Alliance.Dunn applauds the effort to increase donations, but she says she can’t stand behind this bill because of too many unknowns. Plus, she says the major stakeholders in organ donations, such as donor hospitals and transplant centers, had no input into the bill. [rsb emphasis]
That’s where the problem lies here, folks. Whenever legislators want to create sweeping changes with a proposed bill, the best way to get support behind it is to talk to the people who are directly involved with the areas where the proposed changes would be made before such a bill is introduced. It’s not that those stakeholders are automatically right in their objections to not being consulted first, but in politics it’s always best to have them behind you at the press conference announcing the legislation, rather than criticizing your bill in the newspapers.
You must be logged in to post a comment.
BY: Lauren Boebert is a Worthless POS
IN: Who Will Win the Republican Vacancy Appointment in CO-04?
BY: NOV GOP meltdown
IN: It’s Official: Colorado Republicans Need A New Lawyer
BY: spaceman2021
IN: Thursday Open Thread
BY: davebarnes
IN: Thursday Open Thread
BY: MichaelBowman
IN: Get More Smarter on Thursday (March 28)
BY: MichaelBowman
IN: Thursday Open Thread
BY: 2Jung2Die
IN: Yes, Please: Guns Out Of The State Capitol
BY: MichaelBowman
IN: Get More Smarter on Thursday (March 28)
BY: Lauren Boebert is a Worthless POS
IN: Thursday Open Thread
BY: Lauren Boebert is a Worthless POS
IN: Thursday Open Thread
Subscribe to our monthly newsletter to stay in the loop with regular updates!
She will do for the organ donation program what she did for North High School during her term on the Denver Board of Education.
It pisses me off. As a person who has been lucky enough to survive more than one cancer, I have been told not to donate blood and not to donate organs. It is nobody’s gd business what I write on my license. I don’t want to explain anything to anybody. I also do not want anybody to know what I am doing…least of all the Driver Licence Divison.
God. The only thing good about this is it will keep lucia occupied from coming up with something more bizarre.
because forcing an opt-out isn’t exactly in line with the notion of freedom of choice. But why you feel you’d have to explain why you can’t donate your organs? I’m positive they couldn’t ask why if this bill became law.
When you pry them from my cold dead fingers….
Wait, I’ll already be dead. Nevermind….
Seriously I don’t like the idea of this bill where they are forcing it to be an opt-out, I much prefer the opt-in methodology and have it be a decision made by me and my family, rather than by default by the state.
…at least not beforehand. Most people don’t even think about it until that loved one is dead, and that’s when it’s the hardest to make a rational decision. Grief and anger get in the way a bit….
This also gets into the way of the “well, you can ask when I’m dead” argument. The moment you expire, the clock starts ticking on the viability of transplanting your organs. And while you’re family may eventually have a discussion that ends with them allowing your organs to be harvested, it could be too late.
Besides, you’re a Raiders fan. You have no heart in your corrupt, dark body….
Then my team wouldn’t be playing in a championship game.
I thought about joining the Army once, turns out I wasn’t qualified…. My parents were married and I was born in wedlock…
Fortunately the Corps didn’t consider those attributes disqualifying.
Here’s a joke:
What is this?
“Oorah!” “OoRAH! Oorah!” “oo-rah!”
Two Marines in a conversation.
Let me help you out:
First Marine: Oohrah! = Army fucked it up again did they?
Second Marine: Oorah! = Did you expect anything else?
First Marine: Oorah! = Idiots probably got a paper-cut on their finger from their reports, and now we have to do our job as well as theirs.
Second Marine: Oorah! = This is stupid but we are going to do it anyway.
Overall it is very similar in translation to that term I got ingrained into my Brain down at Fort Benning: Hooh! Personally I was impressed them because the Army managed to use multiple vowels in the same word, though it doesn’t really spell anything
Two points.
1) To some extent, I think legislators are damned if you do and damned if you don’t. a quote from the original post.
I just have a sneaking suspicion that if this had been about energy, mining or banking, and the major stakeholders (the businesses) had been involved, there would be complaints against it.
2) Best solution I have heard to the woeful organ transplant supply we have: you can only be eligible to receive an organ of you are already on the donor list.
In the meantime, I will support the opt-out bill.
As I wrote that I was thinking the same thing. IIRC, that is exactly what happened when the O&G regs were being discussed in 2009.
But it’s not even really about whether the people complain or not. It’s about CYA. If the stakeholders end up complaining, you can point to the fact that they were brought to the table. You don’t have the problem that Pabon and Guzman are facing now where the bill is probably DOA because nobody talked to Donor Alliance about it.
When the oil and as regs were written, oil and gas was at the table.
And in this case, Donor Alliance is the good guys. So not having them at the table makes absolutely no sense.
My response:
Anyway, I agree.
I just replied to the wrong post. 🙂
An interesting concept. Does this fly in the face of any religious beliefs concerning the proper disposition of a body after death?
from the OrganDonor.Gov website:
“Most religions support organ and tissue donation as a charitable act of love and giving. This information is provided to help answer some of your questions.”
Adapted from: Organ and Tissue Donation: A Reference Guide for Clergy, 1995.
http://organdonor.gov/donation…
Which leads to a list where you just find your particular faith’ s link, and click for the answer.
I think that only the Shinto belief precludes organ donation (death and impurity, and all that….)
You aren’t allowed to identify the organs you are willing to donate, such as kidneys. You can only identify what you would not donate and they don’t provide a list of the options.
But if you have to opt out, doesn’t it really stop being a “donation”?
“you can check out anytime you like, but you can never leave.”
Not opt in or out – you are explicitly asked. (I’m a full body donor – if they want it… And I have told my wife & daughters that’s what I want.)
who isn’t asked? No matter what, every time I had a DL issue (once upon a time my foot was made of lead) they asked if a) I was registered to vote and b) am I still an organ donor. Both questions came with a disapproving eyebrow raise while they waited for me to answer correctly.
Every now and again we see these little pseudo issues and I can’t figure out who they are directed at.
Probably, if we really want to take on the issue, there should be a greater campaign explaining how to fill out the paperwork (for donation to live people AND for the rest to go to science) before you die so your family isn’t stuck with what to do with you. Sometimes last wishes aren’t so clear and turn into a huge pain in the ass.
When I say no at the DLB, I get the raised eyebrow, too and a
silent tut tut. I hate it. Sometimes I just want to breathe heavily on the clerk and say I am contagious. (As an old person, I have to renew every five years).
Professor Kaplan of the University of Penn. was on talk radio yesterday (Silverman?), He is the go-to expert on bioethics and evidently is the author or at least a strong supporter of this effort. But he stumbled around a lot of the issues. I found it very disconcerting. For example, he said in an accident, a driver’s license might not be available quickly enough to see that the victim was an organ donor. However, the host pointed out that the same circumstance would exist if the victim was an “opt-out.” Kaplan hemmed and hawed…unusual for him.
My suggestion: Set up a computer list of all organ donors and make it available to all hospitals. Get out of the license business.
And for god’s sakes, don’t let Guzman anywhere near it.
It’s listed on my driver’s license.
That decision was made after a heart-to-heart decision with my family.
I do not want the fucking legislature making those decisions for me. I’ll make them my damned self, thank you.
Maybe the legislature ought to get busy getting people back to work instead of making moral decisions for the rest of us.
= EASY
Mathematics (e.g., figuring out a state budget) = HARD
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v…
Who needs “death panels” when you can have “donation panels?”
to the DMV if you don’t want to be an organ donor.
I just blew Diet Coke out my nose.
Lucia Guzman told Lynn Bartels today that she’s killing the bill because it wouldn’t have been able to get out of committee.
Hopefully lesson learned.