Should people be legally obligated to donate tissue, blood, and organs?

Nope. Life ,liberty,and property.

It is my life

My right

and My body

To answer the OP's question, no. And it's ridiculous to think that anyone who isn't involved first-hand in needing a transplant or knowing someone who does would support such a law.

Some of the answers, however, also need a response.

Shortkakez1 - there are many people who are selfless enough to donate blood and bone marrow for strangers, and willingly go through the pain required to do so because it means saving a LIFE. What if you needed that donation? Please watch the video link below - it's just for you.

Sad Spirit - if you are a living donor to someone, and then you end up needing that same organ, you go to the top of the waiting list.

Marie W - the story about the morgues in Philadelphia was about illegal tissue recovery. There is no way a morgue could conduct organ recovery because the heart actually needs to be kept beating by a ventilator in order for organs to be functioning and recoverable. By the time someone reaches the morgue, they are completely disconnected by a ventilator and their organs will have ceased functioning as soon as blood stopped being pumpted to them.

No. The government should never have the right to tell a person they have to have a surgical procedure done. There is much more involved in this than just having it done. What if a person has complications as a result of their surgery where they are donating the organs, and they die. It would not be right, in my opinion. I don't believe I should be able to be called up tomorrow and told I have to donate one of my kidneys because someone needs it. What if I don't need my extra kidney now, but in 20-30 years I do, but the government took it away. Its wrong and immoral in my opinion. Also, who would supplement my salary while I am gone? Should I be required to take sick time, or lose my pay during my recuperation? Also, what about the people that are against this on the religious standpoint? Some don't believe in medical procedures religiously. What about people that have fears of needles, or medical procedures? It is going to put a huge strain on them and could harm them more than help. There are too many negatives for requiring someone to donate something from within their body.

I disagree.

This is almost some sort of 'eye for an eye' ethics code you've created here, referring to the example you made about the car crash. It'd be a forced donor situation, and as 'donating' means to give freely, taking someone's organ as payment for another's is wrong.

Also, some religions believe giving and receiving blood or organs is wrong, so you can't necessarily invent some sort of 'opt out' donor programme. Human rights also comes into this somehow. You can't expect living donors to freely donate organs or blood as required, and it's not just a simple choice to become an organ donor.

As far as blood and plasma donation goes, the diseases carried in blood are too risky to sign everyone up, especially if the the one who's donating doesn't know they're HIV positive for example.

Any medical procedure is technically life threatening. People even die when undergoing simple plastic surgery (such as Kanye West's mother). Why should anyone be forced to undergo any medical procedure against their will, when most refuse to get medical treatment they need for themselves to begin with? Someone who has less tissues or organs will be weaker and live less, and nobody has the right to take life away from a living person against their will. It is grounds for involuntary manslaughter charges. What a selfish question! I'd never ever ask anyone to give up their body parts for me! SELFISH. I tried giving blood once, I weigh 100 pounds and they took the amount they would take from a 200 pound person without caring of what they were doing to me, literally ungrateful blood thirsty whores. I passed out and couldn't go to work for 2 days. NO THANK YOU! I always regret not having sued them.

And what if the government seized one of my kidneys only for one of mine to fail down the line and I don't have a second one nor a match or too weak to undergo a transplant or the transplant doesn't take and I die, or my own sibling needed one that matched mine exactly, but they gave mine to some jail inmate who I don't even know. NO WAY, you must be on dope to think this is ok. Do you also think the government should seize our homes or cars to hand out to someone they deem deserves one too? Also if the government is going to seize tissue/blood/organs, they should first have to get the signed consent of every single family member and close friend of the person giving up their rights which the person would rather save their body parts to give to first. Plus compensate several million. Plus the government should be liable for several millions should anything go wrong as a consequence. Yup, on taxpayers dime obviously. So if someone has their eye on my organ cuz they see I'm a healthy non-smoker, they have to go through all my family members first. And hey, if my family members have a say, shouldn't I also, considering it's mine to begin with? hmmm.

If they are truly non-essential, then you wouldn't really need them to survive, would you?

It is unethical to force someone to give up their body parts (organs, whatever). However, I do believe in live donor surgery and working on a transplant floor (as I have) I witnessed the love and generosity of an overwhelming number of people donating organs (mainly kidneys) to save another. You can donate blood at any time, and many people do.

I support your idea in theory, but realistically and ethically, it can not be done.

My chum very those days had an journey with this. He wanted to donate blood, he's sort O, someone-friendly donor. In his little questionnaire, he pronounced that it looked slightly biased against gay adult adult males, asking questions approximately if he's EVER had an analogous intercourse actual relationship with a guy, and asking women human beings if that they had ever had a actual relationship with a guy who has been with a guy. His bump into became sparkling, yet they advised him he could desire to no longer donate. they could desire to show the blood for AIDS and such illnesses, yet they did no longer even try his blood and referred to as up a itemizing so he could desire to in no way donate blood returned. i'm sorry, besides the undeniable fact that it is AIDS. Lifesource got here to our college and that they have been in keeping with old rules, he pronounced the try appeared as though it became created throughout the outbreak and commonplace panic of AIDS, while maximum theory that it became synonymous with homosexuality. it is actual that homosexuality has been particularly commonplace interior the gay community, expertise and care has lessened the probability. I agree that it is unfair yet some human beings will restrict gay adult adult males from giving blood without a try, my present day chum is data. If it is any convenience, my chum additionally defined approximately his pal who lived in Europe for 5 years... seven years in the past. curiously he's likewise been placed on the record through fact he could desire to have mad cow.

Just a tip, next time make your question shorter. Honestly I doubt anyone read the whole thing. I would not support a law requiring people to have to donate their body parts. It isn't fair. Its disgusting. I hate needles and blood and doctors and that antiseptic smell and no law is gonna require me to go near it.

Well, i think it depends on the person you are asking. I mean I think a lot of people would donate if they had the chance, but that should be their decision. and like what if they ended up needing it later in their life? I would donate, but you know there are some health risks some people can't and won't take.

No.My body, my being. If I release a form so be it. I will give blood. Not very keen on being an experiment let alone a donor for anothers profit. In Philadelphia there were a couple of morgues harvesting organs for pure profit and no intent of humanity.

1 pint of blood a month for healthy people will not do them any harm.

but tissues and organs well that's a different matter and should be up to the individual