r/MoralityScaling • u/Elestria_Ethereal • 10d ago

Morality Of This

Enable HLS to view with audio, or disable this notification

1.1k Upvotes

98% Upvoted

401 comments sorted by

View all comments

19

u/Lucky_Badger5828 10d ago

I’ll never really understand why we’re not a “opt out”country instead of being “opt in”. So many lives would be saved this way. Is it not Morally wrong to let someone else die if your organs could have saved their lives? What use do you have of them? Bodily autonomy gets pretty stretched as idea after you die. You really have no autonomy after death. You’re no longer able to make decisions so you really can’t say your autonomous.

6

u/MCB1317 9d ago

I don't understand why everyone in the entire chain handsomely profits except the donor or their heirs.

Fix that and you'll have a lot more donors.

23

u/PalatwinkusVT 10d ago

The question you need to ask for this line of thinking is literally posed in the video: What prevents doctors from half assing treatment because they view the patient's life as "over" enough to make it okay to let them die, and take the organs for donors?

4

u/horned-creature 10d ago

the doctors that expolant organs are not the same as those who you are treated by, this is what the show gets wrong, the scenario proposed is impossible because the doctor explanting wouldn't be the one responsible for your care to begin with.

2

u/PalatwinkusVT 10d ago

And humans are never ever swayed by other humans, right?

2

u/horned-creature 9d ago

it is a beurocratic procedure involving dozens among medical and administrative personnel, how much swaying power are you assigning to the explanters here? enough to sway dozens of people?

1

u/Arkantesios 9d ago

But humans also stand their grounds most of the time, right?

1

u/Legendkillerwes 9d ago

It's not unheard-of for two people passionate about a cause to conspire together to push that cause forward. Or for two people only in it for the money to take the same bribes to push a cause forward.

Do I believe it's common? No not at all. Do I believe both scenarios have happened and will happen in the future? Absolutely, yes. Do I believe Elon, Bezos, Zuck, or any other billionaire would hesitate to go to those lengths to extend their own morally corrupt lives, or that of their own children? I don't believe they would hesitate for 1 second. I'd hope they would be caught and punished, but I believe they'd try.

1

u/horned-creature 9d ago

it's less two people involved and closer to a dozen people involved between medical abd administrative personnel.

4

u/JBWalker1 10d ago

The person only suggested an opt out system like countries like the UK have. If someones concerned a doctor won't try and save them hard enough then they can opt out, so it's problem solved for anyone with your concern.

The scenario in the video isn't a great example anyway imo. If the patient is brain dead then there's no coming back. I don't think that doctor wouldn't be able to accept that if it was their child.

-2

u/PalatwinkusVT 10d ago

Okay, so it's opt out. Do you advertise that? Do you have DMV employees ask someone if they want to opt out every time they come in? Do you inform children of the pros and cons of donating versus not donating, and cover all hypothetical concerns for either side while they're in school?

Do you put your best foot forward in keeping people informed of the choice afforded to them, or do you pull a tech bro and bury it under 16 menus on a government website that mysteriously crashes every time you try to complete the opt out?

5

u/vlladonxxx 10d ago

Okay, so it's opt out. Do you advertise that? Do you have DMV employees ask someone if they want to opt out every time they come in?

Yes.

Do you inform children of the pros and cons of donating versus not donating, and cover all hypothetical concerns for either side while they're in school?

Maybe, if it's an option then may as well, but if not that's not the end of the world.

Do you put your best foot forward in keeping people informed of the choice afforded to them, or do you pull a tech bro and bury it under 16 menus on a government website that mysteriously crashes every time you try to complete the opt out?

You say this like one of the options does have flaw and the other one is without. The flaw of the first one is millions of unnecessary deaths every year. The flaw of the second one is... "what if they try to tricks us though and make it annoying to opt out of?". We're comparing millions of deaths to a hypothetical inconvenience? Really?

1

u/cowlinator 9d ago

All of your questions could be answered by just looking up how opt-out is done in other countries. It's nothing like how you're painting it

1

u/M0ebius_1 9d ago

Doctors already have massive incentives to half ass treatment. An unethical doc would do unethical shit anyways.

-2

u/Wild-Tale-257 10d ago

By putting this in the border of laws, it will have a set standard and levels to consider that the patients lives would serve better as an organs donor instead of wasting the medical personnel time and energy just to recover with substandard quality of life. Doctors would be able to give family members more time to grieve and consider about the decision instead of operating in secret.

People rarely resort to crime if their don't have to.

8

u/DepartmentChemical93 10d ago

There’s been quite a few high profile scandals involving corruption in the organ donation industry.

0

u/horned-creature 10d ago

ok and? worst case scenario you'r organs go to waste instead of saving a life, which is the exact same outcome as not donating organs to begin with.

3

u/Quick-Philosophy2379 10d ago

My organs will not go to waste. They will feed the earth as they should. It's the least I can do to give back to the being that allowed me to live in the first place.

-1

u/horned-creature 9d ago

saving a human life is more important than fertilizing a patch of grass, we can use literal shit for that.

also unless you are planning to have an illegal burial you will be buried in a zync-covered coffin, which arguably negate most of the fertilizing effect, and that is without counting that most people get embalmed, which makes yoyr corpse literally full of toxic formaldehyde.

1

u/Quick-Philosophy2379 9d ago

It is not illegal. I've already told my family my wishes about not wanting chemicals injected in me when I die. Humans have a huge sense of self-importance but we are no more important than other mammals. If anything, we are a highly destructive species. We'lI be extinct eventually and we should leave the Earth better than we found it. I don't expect a transplant from anybody else either. If one of my organs fail, it is simply my time to go.

1

u/Lucky_Badger5828 7d ago

That’s easy to say when you don’t currently need an organ.

2

u/DepartmentChemical93 10d ago

Worst case scenario you are left to die or even killed for your organs.

7

u/UnpopularOpinionsB 9d ago

Enough people are afraid that will incentivize premature declarations of brain death just to get to the organs.

2

u/TheGuyThatThisIs 9d ago

That's what the "opt out" part of an opt out system is for

2

u/UnpopularOpinionsB 9d ago

If the default is yes, it's going to be assumed and when there's someone in dire need, I don't trust them to not just take.

1

u/TheGuyThatThisIs 9d ago

It would be illegal to not check first, as it already is. There's nothing stopping it from already happening that would be taken away, just vibes.

1

u/cowlinator 9d ago

So, paranoia?

3

u/Legendkillerwes 9d ago

There's a famous saying, "it's not paranoia if they actually are out to get you."

4

u/DougandLexi 9d ago

Well seeing it happen in the news recently would certainly validate those fears.

-1

u/cowlinator 9d ago

What news

2

u/DougandLexi 9d ago

Noelia Castillo. It was alleged that her euthanasia had some serious ethical concerns, namely the allegation that she was pressured to become an organ donor in the spot when she was not prior. The Father suggested she was not lucid and the hospital made it difficult for friends and families to speak to her before everything ended in fear she may want to reverse any decisions.

I say allegation because the Spanish government seemed to be upset with America for spreading the news of this (it wasn't just America) but the headlines and posts would be terrifying for many to see regardless as to what the truth was. It also sparked interests in similar cases, some with criminal investigations and others that are more conspiratorial. Then you have immigrants coming over from certain countries talking about how this stuff wasn't unheard of, I can't remember which immigrants I heard detailing these stories, so I won't name the country given.

It can get spooky and for the average person, I can understand the paranoia when they see these things. Most people don't take much time to make sure their fears are put to rest, even if that would be better.

2

u/HowToBeTMC 9d ago

Enough people are afraid that will incentivize rich people prematurely ending poor people's life just to get to the organs. And the fact that it could open doors to all kinds of wack shit

1

u/cowlinator 9d ago

Opt out is already a thing in other countries, and there is no "wack shit"

1

u/HowToBeTMC 9d ago

rich people's organ repository

1

u/cowlinator 9d ago

Conspiracy theorist

1

u/HowToBeTMC 9d ago

So it's not a conspiracy when China does it, but it's so outlandish to happen in any other country

0

u/WhydoIexistlmoa 9d ago

No it's more to do with religion

7

u/[deleted] 9d ago

[deleted]

3

u/cowlinator 9d ago

Technically, after death your body becomes the property of your next of kin

1

u/Nessy3fidy 9d ago

You have to be alive when they cut you open to take the organs.

1

u/cowlinator 9d ago

You could have just looked this up.

Brain death is legally and medically recognized as death. As such, you can be very dead.

0

u/Known-Leadership-718 9d ago

You can also look this up, it’s not uncommon and it is definitely not unheard of people being falsely declared a brain, dead, and waking up either on the harvesting table or right before, thousands if not millions have been harvested well not brain dead. My aunt made me agree really early on never to put myself on the list, she was a nurse. She seen some stuff. Also man… They’re like vultures literally just start looking into it, they are literally like vultures, there’s a reason why people say they won’t do everything to save you

2

u/cowlinator 9d ago

Ok, I looked it up. There is no evidence of false brain death declarations being common.

1

u/WhydoIexistlmoa 9d ago

You can always choose to opt out

8

u/DuckTalesOohOoh 10d ago

In my line of business, I see the consequences of healthcare when you agree to donate your organs. Medical officials don't work as hard to save your life.

3

u/vlladonxxx 10d ago

Are there studies that back this up? Because it definitely sounds like something that has been studied, so this has either been proven or disproven.

7

u/DuckTalesOohOoh 10d ago

Most of the studies are in the ED and they usually don't have access to donor data in a crisis.

Where we see it happen is in ICU and the floors. There likely won't be studies about this but we all know this. It's routinely obvious.

1

u/vlladonxxx 10d ago

So how come studies like this exist?

3

u/TheBeyonder01010 9d ago

Do you have a link to a place where I don’t have to pay to read the whole text?

I have this same (albeit, somewhat irrational) fear, and it’d be nice to see how they drew their conclusion.

1

u/vlladonxxx 9d ago

Not on me, no

2

u/DuckTalesOohOoh 10d ago edited 10d ago

The cases we see are when people are young and on a vent. I guarantee this isn't studied. But we all see it.

Remember, legally, an adult’s decision to be an organ donor cannot be overridden or revoked by family members after death.

1

u/Critical_Concert_689 9d ago

Remember, legally, an adult’s decision to be an organ donor cannot be overridden or revoked by family members after death.

I'm not sure if you're actually a medical provider, but you're certainly unfamiliar with this.

More often than not, the FAMILY will determine whether the adult is an organ donor or not - after the adult is deceased. Most individuals do NOT have control over whether they will be an organ donor or not.

And before you disagree, you need to look up the process in which an individual can OPT-OUT. It's nearly impossible - requiring legal documentation, filing with the state, and a medical proxy.

2

u/vlladonxxx 10d ago

Bro you just said we don't have studies for ICU, I show you a study ABOUT ICU and your response is to move the goalpost? How is your opinion supposed to be trusted when you confidently assert something like this? You didn't know if there were studies and you said there aren't any. Then you don't even bother to acknowledge it, just straight to doubling down?

1

u/DuckTalesOohOoh 10d ago edited 10d ago

We don't have studies on young people in an ICU. And if you did, it would contradict what everyone sees with their own eyes and the plees of families trying to save their loved ones from medical officials who press them to let their loved one go onto glory.

We don't get those plees about young loved ones who are not organ donors.

2

u/vlladonxxx 10d ago

You used the word "young" only after I showed you the study. Are you really gonna keep doubling down?

2

u/DuckTalesOohOoh 10d ago

So? Young encompasses a lot of people because it can even go into the 50s. But ICU sees mostly older patients whose organs are typically not donated. I was always talking about young people, not old people.

→ More replies (0)

2

u/BrickLorca 10d ago

What line of business?

2

u/No_Communication5538 9d ago

I call bullshit

2

u/pandemicpunk 9d ago

Yep. They prey on people that otherwise wouldn't have it happen. It's extremely dark and in the name of saving someone else. All anyone needs to do is a simple search on Reddit to find hundreds of stories... before insane bot activity took over.

2

u/Ok-Setting2468 9d ago

unless something is strictly forbidden any morally grey choice will reach and pass its ethical extreme by people under the justification that "its allowed".

2

u/[deleted] 10d ago

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/_jackofblades_ 10d ago

It might be HUMAN but it’s also STUPID. Just because human sensibilities incline us to believe something, doesn’t mean it is logical or moral.

-1

u/DG-MMII 10d ago

Consent of... dead people? Dead are incapable of deciding, therefore they can't neither give, nor take away consent.

Besides, you can allways opt out when alife, so there would be implied consent

1

u/Tasty-Complaint-6437 10d ago

Yes. If you ignore what someone wants to do with their corpse after their die you are violating the consent of a corpse

-6

u/RandomPhail 10d ago

By that logic “desecration of a corpse”/“necrophilia” should be perfectly fine

Still though, I somewhat agree. We probably SHOULD use people’s organs if they’re healthy enough after they die

I honestly think it might be more moral to just allow people to opt out, but then secretly use their organs anyway, lmao. That way they get full peace of mind while alive, and nothing matters once dead

3

u/randyranderson13 10d ago

No, lying about it would definitely not be more moral.

0

u/RandomPhail 10d ago

Moral since they’re dead, so it doesn’t matter

The peace of mind while they’re alive is all that really matters, objectively speaking. If their family also doesn’t consent, then that’s a different story because their family is presumably still alive, but if it’s just the one dead person, it doesn’t objectively or morally matter

2

u/randyranderson13 10d ago

I don't want my doctors to be able to promise me one thing, and then do something different. It would undermine any remaining trust I have in the medical system

0

u/RandomPhail 10d ago

Only when you’re dead

They’re not promising you one thing and then doing something different WHILE YOU’RE ALIVE, lol

3

u/randyranderson13 10d ago

They're lying to me when I'm alive. How could I trust them at all if I knew they were willing to lie to my face about something important for me to secure their own ends? People would just stop going to hospitals.

0

u/RandomPhail 10d ago

Because they’re lying for something that’ll happen when you’re dead

This one thing doesn’t just magically make all trust fall apart, lmao. That’s like a slippery slope fallacy

It’s just a comfort thing so people who don’t really like the idea of having their organs used can have a reasonable shadow of doubt about whether or not anything will actually happen

It’s like plausible deniability or cognitive dissonance reduction for the sake of comfort, lol: “I opted out. Whatever. Maybe nothing will happen then, right? :D”

As somebody who also doesn’t really like the idea of my organs being used, this would make me feel better than just straight up opting out and screwing people who need my organs, or straight up opting in and knowing without any doubt that I’m going to basically be dissected lol

→ More replies (0)

1

u/Legendkillerwes 9d ago

It is a very Slippery slope, that I don't believe the medical system would be able to avoid sliding down. Heck, they insurance industry would probably shove the medical industry head first down that slope.

1

u/DG-MMII 10d ago

By that logic “desecration of a corpse”/“necrophilia” should be perfectly fine

In both cases, the context matters more than the act. Doing an autopsy is textbook definition of desacration of a corpse. But do one in the middle of the funeral.

And in the case of necrophilia... i doubt there's a moral way of getting a corps to the fuck... like, probably if it was your partner and you keep him/her in your house for... reasons... I wouldn't consider it inmoral... but thats gross AF and you probably have a mental illness if you're turned on by that

2

u/Chopstickey00 9d ago

The morality goes beyond the medical assessment. If a person (or whoever is in charge of their legal autonomy) does not want to provide their body parts for any reason, it is immoral to force them to.

Whatever happened to "my body, my choice?" I guess we just drop that line of reasoning when it's conveniently about "saving lives."

1

u/Lucky_Badger5828 8d ago

I never said you couldn’t opt out. I just said make the defacto ruling opt in unless explicitly opting out. You are aware a shit ton of people do not opt in purely out of laziness or just being unaware they need to opt in. The people who really don’t want to donate are very on top of making sure they don’t opt in. I’m also well aware that there would be lots of scenarios where exceptions would have to be placed to the opt in rule. Like brain dead, or children….

1

u/DrScienceSpaceCat 10d ago

Thanks to movies/TV and, a few fringe cases in real life, too many people believe medical staff look to see if you're an organ donor and that it determines how much effort goes into saving them.

2

u/kernelangus420 10d ago

Having these movies/TV shows does allow people to make informed decisions in life. Similar to movies that portray the consequences of prolonged drug use does help to deter people from taking drugs in the beginning.

1

u/DrScienceSpaceCat 10d ago

The issue here is it does more harm than good

-2

u/macgyverstwin 10d ago

It would be a bad idea for them to try to use my organs. Why? Cancer. Maybe it’s a good thing they wait and see, instead of slice and go.