ORGAN DONATION PRESUMED CONSENT IS WRONG.

It seems that our masters are determined to return us all to the dark days of the 19th century when even our bodies were not our own.

It's reported that the government is planning to introduce a new law under which the question of organ donation would be dealt with by 'presumed consent'. In other words, unless the deceased person had specifically opted out of such donation, their organs would be presumed to be available for doctors to do with as they please. The law would not apply to children, which I imagine means those under the age of 18, but would, no doubt, apply to those who, for example, died unexpectedly and had simply not got around to opting out of the scheme. It also seems likely that relatives, other than those of children, would no longer have a voice.

Back in time, the bodies of executed murderers were made available to medical schools under the provisions of the Murder Act of 1752. However, the increasing interest in medical science and a fall in the number of available bodies meant that this source of supply gradually became insufficient and this gave rise to the rather unsavoury trade of the 'resurrectionists', people who dug up freshly buried bodies and sold them to medical schools and students for their research and training. By the early 1800s, it was becoming clear that the law needed to be changed though it was not until the passing of the Anatomy Act in 1832 that anything actually happened.

Under this Act, the needs of physicians, surgeons and students were met by giving them legal access to corpses that were unclaimed after death, which meant many of those died in prison, hospital or a workhouse. The Act also allowed next of kin to donate a relative's body in return for burial at the expense of the anatomy school, something which was akin to the selling of the corpse, and individuals could also donate their own bodies although relatives could object to this.

The real effect of this Act was to make the corpses of the poor generally available for anatomical dissection, whether they liked it or not. Inevitably, there were protests although these were mostly ignored and the effects of the 1832 Act remained in force until it was repealed in England and Wales in 1984; access to the bodies of the deceased is now regulated by the Human Tissue Authority, but the wide-ranging access which was available under the 1832 Act no longer exists.

What the government is now proposing is a return to the days of the 1830s when the poor and uneducated were not even allowed the dignity of burial, but could have their bodies chopped up by any passing doctor. The latest proposals would mean much the same, with the wealthy and knowledgeable being able to opt out of the scheme while the poor and uneducated could well find themselves being cut up simply because they didn't understand how the law worked or hadn't known how to opt out. No doubt, opting out of the scheme will be made confusing and difficult, so as to ensure that few actually do it, poor or not.

One wonders how the much vaunted rules and regulations around 'equality' will be applied in the event of an opt out system being introduced. Will those who opt out of donating their own organs still be entitled to receive the organs of others should the need arise ? How will different religious beliefs be accommodated ? Would the law apply to all who live here or would, say, foreign nationals be excluded ? 

The enactment of such a law would be an infringement of the liberties of every single person in our society. My body belongs to me, not to the state and for the state to 'presume' authority over it after my death is anathema to me, as it should be to every right minded person. I have no objection whatsoever to organ donation but it must be by the specific wish of the donor, not a result of theft by the state.

Should this law come to pass, I will be among the first to opt out, however difficult the government makes it.