Quote:
|
Originally Posted by JinnKai
How, precisely, would you indicate that "choice" to those of us who were still living? In the absense of a written will or a "sticker," the decision should always default to the family, and then the government. What other choice is there? By putting an opt-out sticker, this simply solidifies an already implicit rule so that people can be "donated" without so much litigation.
|
How, precisely, will you guarantee that a person who has a vehement objection to being (what they consider) desecrated will be treated in accordance with his or her wishes?
If you want to believe that a hospital wouldn't "lose" the opt-out of a person with a rare blood type, that's up to you. Like I said in the previous post, there's a huge financial incentive for them to do exactly that.
As far as I'm concerned, it's a much better system that the hospital has to prove they have permission to cut up my friends and family, rather than for me to prove that they
don't have permission.