The common objection to opt-out systems of postmortal organ procurement is that they allow removal of a deceased person's organs without their actual consent. However, under certain conditions it is possible for ‘silence’—failure to register any objection—conventionally and/or legally to count as genuine consent. Prominent conditions are that the consenter should be fully informed about the meaning of his or her silence and that the costs of registering dissent should be insignificant. This paper explicates this thesis and discusses some possible objections to it: (1) it cannot possibly be guaranteed that each citizen is aware of the meaning of silence; and (2) the system is slightly manipulative because it exploits a common defect in autonomous decision-making.
- Donation/procurement of organs/tissues
- opt-out system
- organ donation
- presumed consent
- tacit consent
Statistics from Altmetric.com
If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.
Read the full text or download the PDF:
Other content recommended for you
- Opt-out organ donation without presumptions
- Opt-out organ procurement and tacit consent
- Understanding (and) consent: a response to MacKay
- Normative consent and opt-out organ donation
- Healthcare students support opt-out organ donation for practical and moral reasons
- The potential impact of an opt-out system for organ donation in the UK
- Opt-out donation and tacit consent: a reply to Wilkinson and De Wispelaere
- A public opinion survey: is presumed consent the answer to kidney shortage in Hong Kong?
- Evidence of support for biobanking practices
- Short-term impact of introducing a soft opt-out organ donation system in Wales: before and after study