If you were required to be an organ donor, you’d save lives while setting yourself free. You’ll also give someone else a chance at taking the spot you had at work and your apartment.

  • AwesomeLowlander
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    11
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    15 hours ago

    Since you mentioned it - organ donation should be opt out, not opt in. It wouldn’t even be controversial, everybody still has freedom of choice.

    Edit: I’m really curious what those downvoting me are objecting to. At least leave a comment or something!

    • Chee_Koala@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      12 hours ago

      We have it half way in between in NL: If you don’t opt out of organ donation, they will register: “Did not object to donation”. Without a definite yes, close family could still opt you out (after you lose the ability to share your thoughts) if they feel strongly against donating. With a definite yes, that option is also no longer available.

      I think the full “opt-out” way should be fine too, if you really feel strongly against sharing working organs, you have the option to not do it, so no one is forced to do anything, and with opt-out the amount of organs available will be much larger, saving lives.