Doctors' attitudes towards opting-out and the implication of this legislation for a small island state

Abstract

The debate on whether to introduce the opting-out system is complex and involves various ethical, philosophical, psychological and legal issues. Different answers are given to questions such as "Who owns the body of the dead person? Does the State own the body of the deceased person or does the body belong to the next of kin? Should the decision whether or not to donate the organs of a dead relative be taken by the State? How informed are people about opting-out? If persons are not aware of the system, would the organs still be taken even when relatives are against opting-out?" Because there is no consensus regarding these and other questions, some sections of society and groups may present resistance to introducing the system. On the other hand, doctors' associations as well as other lobby groups argue that organs should not go to waste and agree with State intervention to retrieve more organs through the introduction of opting-out. The question asked by those in favour of opting-out is "How fair is it for thousands of people to keep on waiting for an organ transplant, when it is possible to reduce these numbers drastically by legislation?" This is the problem facing policy makers. Should the state try to encourage and facilitate a gradual change in public opinion towards opting-out or should legislation on presumed consent be introduced? ; peer-reviewed