Letter: Whose organs?
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.Sir: For Professor Harris's scheme to be enacted, there will need to be a full debate on the circumstances of organ donation.
It is suggested by Professor Harris and others that the removal of organs at post-mortem examination is similar to that at organ donation; this is simply not the case. In the former, death is certain, circulation is stagnant and the body cold. At donation, death is diagnosed, the circulation supported, and the body warm.
These facts, and others which would be even more distasteful to many, are essential for the understanding of organ donation. It would be wholly inappropriate to propose legislation to allow the removal of organs without consent without laying the full facts before the public.
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments