Organ Donation

There are some people out there that would agree with you, but I personally wouldn't care where my organs went to an opt-in or not.

At the very least, I should be able to specify that I only want my organs to go to other donors, or donors should get first dibs on available organs. I think it is wrong for people to benefit from the system and not contribute to it themselves. It is incredibly hypocritical to expect others to donate their organs to save your life if you don't have the decency to do the same for others.

What argument can be made for allowing non-donors to recieve organs? I'll wait for your answer to this before I go further, but the only argument I can think of also serves as an argument for compulsary organ donation.

Just to clarify to prevent unnecessary debate, I'm not saying that people who are ineligible to donate should be ineligible to receive donated organs.

I think the system is setup fairly decently now, and i'm sure the amount of people that are organ donors now is fairily high.

Each day, approximately 77 people recieve an organ transplant. In the same time, 19 people die while waiting for a transplant, due to the shortage of donated organs. (source) That's 6935 people who die every year solely because there aren't enough registered donors. The demand for organs is growing faster than the supply, so these numbers are only getting worse by the day. (source)

At the end of 2009, there were 86.3 million people enrolled in state donor registries, which is approximately 28% of our population. (source) In my opinion, that is DISGUSTING. To make it worse, 1/3 of registered donors never actually get to donate their organs because their families do not consent to it for whatever reason. (source) 28 - 28*(1/3) = ~18.5%.

No matter how you look at it, people who aren't helping fix the problem are being saved by the system while people who ARE helping fix the problem are dying on the waiting list. That is fundamentally wrong, in my opinion.