Organ donation after death: thoughts and experiences?

nimblelynx63 said:Just so we're clear, that donor card doesn't actually carry any legal weight. It was basically just a marketing gimmick from back when they were trying to drum up awareness about organ donation.

In the US, organ donation is governed by the principle of presumed consent. This means you AREN'T officially a donor unless you’ve specifically filed that declaration with your primary care physician.
Before those grief counselors start talking—and honestly, it's because of people like them—doctors who identify potential donors and manage the pre-transplant process NEVER register anyone without sitting down with the family and getting their explicit consent.
So, sure, it's great that you signed the card, but it’s way more important to actually talk to your family and make sure they know exactly what your wishes are.
If anyone here thinks they "heard" or "know" of someone in America having their organs harvested without family permission, feel free to reach out—DM me if you want—and I will gladly help you report that to the proper authorities.

One question for shadownomad43 (respecting your religious and personal views here): during any of your 12 surgeries, or in the recovery periods afterward, did you ever receive blood or blood products? I ask because a transfusion is essentially a form of transplantation in the broader sense.
And thankfully, in the US, awareness regarding transplants has finally started to boost interest in the importance of voluntary blood donation.

NEVER. I have never received blood or any blood products, and I never will.
Because of this, I make it an absolute point before any potential surgery—specifically during my pre-op consultations with the anesthesiologist—to state clearly, and to document in a signed statement, that I am NOT a willing recipient of blood, blood products, or organs.

shadownomad43 said:Here is my take on the matter...
To be perfectly clear, I am firmly opposed to any kind of explantation, implantation, transplantation, or amputation.
And before anyone accuses me of being selfish—which would be quite the contradiction, given that (believe it or not...) I am a regular blood donor.
Why limit myself to just blood?
Because blood is something the body can actually replenish.

If the Architect who designed us had seen fit to include a mechanism for replacing or donating organs, they probably would have built in some sort of biological "reset button" alongside all our other gifts; perhaps organs would simply regenerate, making the whole concept of donation obsolete.

Instead, we were left with the umbilical cord. It’s a bit poetic, really—we are essentially living on a timer that starts ticking the very moment that cord is cut at birth.

So, I don't see people who agree with me as being selfish. If anything, the true selfishness lies with those who try to bypass the natural order through transplants, desperately attempting to artificially extend a deadline that was clearly set long ago.

shadownomad43 said:Exactly. That is precisely the point.
The mere thought of someone else's heart beating inside my chest feels, quite frankly, revolting.

As a side note, I have a pretty extensive medical history—which translates to a significant amount of "hospital experience"—and I am actually facing my 12th surgery in a few days.
Fortunately, or perhaps by the will of God, I don't suffer from any actual organ failure; my issues tend to be more "mechanical" in nature.
However...
Since every surgical procedure (especially those involving general anesthesia) carries its own inherent risks, I took the time to draft a three-page summary of my medical history. I wanted to make things a bit easier for the doctors as they navigate the complexities of my anatomy.

In that document, I made it explicitly clear that I do NOT consent to any amputations, transplants, removals, or implants under any circumstances.
At the same time, I gave them the green light to resuscitate me if things go south, provided they exhaust all efforts while respecting the boundaries I established in the previous sentence.
Essentially, I am fine with being treated using modern medical technology, appropriate medications (assuming they exist), and the specialized knowledge gained through years of schooling. But when the time comes for me to pass away—which, like everyone else, will eventually happen—I want to go out whole. Exactly as I was born.
Whether I am 5, 15, 50, or 155 at the time doesn't matter to me one bit.

I’m not really in the mood for deep philosophical debates, but reading your comments almost made me trip over my own feet.

So, in your first post, you claim that once the umbilical cord is cut, the clock starts ticking—and it just goes until it stops—but then in the next one, you mention waiting for your 12th surgery.

If that's the case, why not just live exactly how your God intended and turn those surgeries down?
Why let doctors cut into you or modify your body if you're against any kind of amputation?

In my book, removing an appendix or treating a stomach ulcer... that's a form of amputation, too. You aren't going into the ground exactly the way your mother brought you into this world because a piece of you is missing.

You're making some very contradictory statements—basically just playing devil's advocate whenever it suits you.
And it seems like anyone who disagrees with you (in any given moment) is automatically wrong.

I realize we're veering off-topic here—since the subject is organ donation—but when you start pushing ideas like "no amputations" or "no transfusions," it's only fair to explain why you personally undergo surgery while lecturing everyone else about an "expiration date."

Oh, and one more thing:
When a single user posts several times in a row like this, it starts to look like they're just having a conversation with themselves.😉

Grace Richardson24 said:I’m not really in the mood for deep philosophical debates, but reading your comments almost made me trip over my own feet.

So, in your first post, you claim that once the umbilical cord is cut, the clock starts ticking—and it just goes until it stops—but then in the next one, you mention waiting for your 12th surgery.

If that's the case, why not just live exactly how your God intended and turn those surgeries down?
Why let doctors cut into you or modify your body if you're against any kind of amputation?

In my book, removing an appendix or treating a stomach ulcer... that's a form of amputation, too. You aren't going into the ground exactly the way your mother brought you into this world because a piece of you is missing.

You're making some very contradictory statements—basically just playing devil's advocate whenever it suits you.
And it seems like anyone who disagrees with you (in any given moment) is automatically wrong.

I realize we're veering off-topic here—since the subject is organ donation—but when you start pushing ideas like "no amputations" or "no transfusions," it's only fair to explain why you personally undergo surgery while lecturing everyone else about an "expiration date."

Oh, and one more thing:
When a single user posts several times in a row like this, it starts to look like they're just having a conversation with themselves.😉

There is a fundamental distinction between surgical intervention and amputation.

Grace Richardson24 said:I’m not really in the mood for deep philosophical debates, but reading your comments almost made me trip over my own feet.

So, in your first post, you claim that once the umbilical cord is cut, the clock starts ticking—and it just goes until it stops—but then in the next one, you mention waiting for your 12th surgery.

If that's the case, why not just live exactly how your God intended and turn those surgeries down?
Why let doctors cut into you or modify your body if you're against any kind of amputation?

In my book, removing an appendix or treating a stomach ulcer... that's a form of amputation, too. You aren't going into the ground exactly the way your mother brought you into this world because a piece of you is missing.

You're making some very contradictory statements—basically just playing devil's advocate whenever it suits you.
And it seems like anyone who disagrees with you (in any given moment) is automatically wrong.

I realize we're veering off-topic here—since the subject is organ donation—but when you start pushing ideas like "no amputations" or "no transfusions," it's only fair to explain why you personally undergo surgery while lecturing everyone else about an "expiration date."

Oh, and one more thing:
When a single user posts several times in a row like this, it starts to look like they're just having a conversation with themselves.😉

An ulcer isn't "amputated"; it’s repaired. It’s a matter of patching a leak rather than losing a limb.

Grace Richardson24 said:I’m not really in the mood for deep philosophical debates, but reading your comments almost made me trip over my own feet.

So, in your first post, you claim that once the umbilical cord is cut, the clock starts ticking—and it just goes until it stops—but then in the next one, you mention waiting for your 12th surgery.

If that's the case, why not just live exactly how your God intended and turn those surgeries down?
Why let doctors cut into you or modify your body if you're against any kind of amputation?

In my book, removing an appendix or treating a stomach ulcer... that's a form of amputation, too. You aren't going into the ground exactly the way your mother brought you into this world because a piece of you is missing.

You're making some very contradictory statements—basically just playing devil's advocate whenever it suits you.
And it seems like anyone who disagrees with you (in any given moment) is automatically wrong.

I realize we're veering off-topic here—since the subject is organ donation—but when you start pushing ideas like "no amputations" or "no transfusions," it's only fair to explain why you personally undergo surgery while lecturing everyone else about an "expiration date."

Oh, and one more thing:
When a single user posts several times in a row like this, it starts to look like they're just having a conversation with themselves.😉

The procedures I undergo are corrective in nature. Nothing is being introduced into my system, nor is anything being permanently extracted. We really shouldn't conflate "correction" with transplantation or amputation.
And let's be clear: I am not lecturing anyone. Everyone is entitled to their own freedom of choice, myself included.
Truth be told, the more people zealously attack my decisions without a shred of respect—even while I remain perfectly respectful of theirs—the more unshakable my own convictions become.

Grace Richardson24 said:I’m not really in the mood for deep philosophical debates, but reading your comments almost made me trip over my own feet.

So, in your first post, you claim that once the umbilical cord is cut, the clock starts ticking—and it just goes until it stops—but then in the next one, you mention waiting for your 12th surgery.

If that's the case, why not just live exactly how your God intended and turn those surgeries down?
Why let doctors cut into you or modify your body if you're against any kind of amputation?

In my book, removing an appendix or treating a stomach ulcer... that's a form of amputation, too. You aren't going into the ground exactly the way your mother brought you into this world because a piece of you is missing.

You're making some very contradictory statements—basically just playing devil's advocate whenever it suits you.
And it seems like anyone who disagrees with you (in any given moment) is automatically wrong.

I realize we're veering off-topic here—since the subject is organ donation—but when you start pushing ideas like "no amputations" or "no transfusions," it's only fair to explain why you personally undergo surgery while lecturing everyone else about an "expiration date."

Oh, and one more thing:
When a single user posts several times in a row like this, it starts to look like they're just having a conversation with themselves.😉

Since you've taken notice of the consecutive posts, it’s a bit odd that you haven't realized they are sequential because they are quoted replies to various different people on the forum.

Good grief...
Not all of us are tech wizards capable of replying to everyone simultaneously within a single post...
Perhaps there is a better way to format this, but I suppose I'll have to figure it out.

Where are you getting this idea that people aren't respecting choices? I respect them. Period. Everyone has the right to decide what happens to their own body and their own health. If someone doesn't want to receive or give anything, that is entirely their prerogative. I haven't noticed anyone attacking people who think like you and wouldn't donate organs—and look, sorry, I don't read every single thread from page one in chronological order, so I missed what was said in the first post. Besides, you managed to find that specific post to reply to, which was written 13 years ago. I'm not okay with that approach either, just so we're clear.

Why are people reacting to your posts and claiming they're judging you or rejecting your view? It's because of how you jumped into the topic and the way you wrote it. If you had just calmly stated, "I wouldn't donate my organs," nobody would have even blinked, let alone started an argument with you. You're the one who started in with this aggressive talk about "artificially extending life." People were annoyed by that, not by your stance on not donating. Your body, your rules.

shadownomad43 said:There is a fundamental distinction between surgical intervention and amputation.

An ulcer isn't "amputated"; it’s repaired. It’s a matter of patching a leak rather than losing a limb.

The procedures I undergo are corrective in nature. Nothing is being introduced into my system, nor is anything being permanently extracted. We really shouldn't conflate "correction" with transplantation or amputation.
And let's be clear: I am not lecturing anyone. Everyone is entitled to their own freedom of choice, myself included.
Truth be told, the more people zealously attack my decisions without a shred of respect—even while I remain perfectly respectful of theirs—the more unshakable my own convictions become.

Since you've taken notice of the consecutive posts, it’s a bit odd that you haven't realized they are sequential because they are quoted replies to various different people on the forum.

Good grief...
Not all of us are tech wizards capable of replying to everyone simultaneously within a single post...
Perhaps there is a better way to format this, but I suppose I'll have to figure it out.

It seems we’ve reached a point where we definitely don't see eye to eye.
Stomach ulcers require removal—they get cut out... just like tumors.
That falls under the same umbrella as amputation.
The tissue is excised and discarded, then the healthy part is stitched back together (whether smaller or larger).
"Patching" is what happens when you cut yourself and they use a few stitches to make sure nothing is sticking out.

The surgeries I undergo are purely corrective. Nothing is being put into me, nor is anything being taken out. So, let's not conflate "correction" with "transplantation," "amputation," and so on...

Even if it is a correction—say, removing excess skin on the abdomen or thighs, or "adjusting" nasal cartilage for a deviated septum—that still involves removing parts of the body God gave you, which you're now discarding with such distaste.😁 Blasphemy!

And let's be clear—I'm not lecturing anyone. Everyone has the right to choose, myself included.
But the more people zealously attack my choice without an ounce of respect—all while I respect theirs—the more unshakable my own decision becomes.

You’ve certainly started generalizing everyone who disagrees with you, even though you're the one "correcting" your own body.
It makes it seem like everyone is out to get you, and you're the lone voice whose opinion isn't allowed.

Let's be real—personally, I don't have a strong stance on organ donation.
In other words, once I'm gone, whether some vultures pick me apart or dismantle me to take whatever is useful... it doesn't matter.

However, I might think twice about *receiving* donated organs—purely because of my long history with immunosuppressants and immunomodulation. This damn chemistry.
Without those meds, I’d accept a donated organ in a heartbeat. But this way, I’d have to pass.
Actually, I probably would be a bit of a fool to do it.
When someone is at death's door, they grab at any straw. Most likely, despite all the side effects and risks, they just want to experience "one more birdsong and one more fragrant spring."

Doesn't the idea of having someone else's organ "installed" inside you strike you as absolutely horrifying?
It’s just a piece of another human being.

As for that desperate craving to endure yet another agonizing day of pure suffering, I'm certain it's driven by nothing more than a paralyzing fear of death.
Everyone has that right, but I never find myself admiring people who act on it. It’s just pathetic.

I think some things are just impossible to wrap your head around until you're actually standing in the middle of it.

Take kidney failure, for example. You’re faced with a choice: spend the rest of your life hooked up to a dialysis machine, or get a transplant. Some people are stuck doing dialysis four times a week. You can't plan anything; your entire existence just revolves around that schedule. Traveling? Forget about it. And don't even get me started on the other complications that come with dialysis. Just the thought of having a catheter shoved into your vein constantly gives me the creeps, and that's just one small part of what these people endure. Imagine being thirsty and not being allowed to drink water whenever you want because your fluid intake is strictly limited between sessions. To me, that sounds like torture. I don't know about you.
If you have a transplanted kidney, you can live a normal life. Sure, you have to watch what you eat, stay on top of your meds, and show up for regular checkups, but your quality of life is worlds better than it was before the transplant when everything was reduced to just home and dialysis.
Look at Klassnić as a current example. The guy played soccer for the national team, traveled the world, had kids—he lived like a normal person thanks to a transplant. I'm sure he preferred that over his situation now, having to deal with dialysis several times a week where everything depends on it. He can't travel easily, and he can't do the big things he used to do when he had that functioning kidney.

And yeah, those organs have an expiration date. If someone asked you if you wanted to die today or in ten years, you'd probably say, "Whatever, let's go with today." Is ten years nothing to you? 🤷 And don't even get me started on when children are involved. No one could tell me they wouldn't dig through dirt with their bare hands and feet—they'd agree to anything just to give a child a fighting chance at life.

John Baker said:Doesn't the idea of having someone else's organ "installed" inside you strike you as absolutely horrifying?
It’s just a piece of another human being.

As for that desperate craving to endure yet another agonizing day of pure suffering, I'm certain it's driven by nothing more than a paralyzing fear of death.
Everyone has that right, but I never find myself admiring people who act on it. It’s just pathetic.

So—blood received through a transfusion isn't actually considered part of another person? —Just a thought!
Oh right—she's just some sort of "renewable fluid," as someone else put it. 🤣

As for that craving to endure yet another desperate day filled with suffering—I’m convinced it really boils down to nothing more than a fear of death.

Life is truly a one-time deal—and honestly, getting to live just one more day to see your child or someone you love again? That’s something no vague story about heaven, eternal life, or any other fairy tale could ever hope to replace. 👍

Any sane individual fears death—only fanatics and lunatics would ever claim otherwise.

Look, I don't get how you guys aren't following me.😬
The connection between a donor and a recipient is deeply personal to me. In a way, that person keeps living on through someone else.
That's why it matters so much to me who I give an organ to, or who I receive one from.

I don't know... I can't just take a technical approach to this. It's not like one person is missing a kidney and another has a spare we can just swap out like car parts.🤷

Anyway, that's my take on it. I'm done talking about it.

I don't know—I’m just thinking out loud here—but once consciousness fades, it’s gone. Now, I know the religious folks will jump in and say it's the soul departing (which is fine by me, even if my own views lean a bit differently)—but that's just how I see it.
All that’s left is a pile of organic matter—which, let's face it, is going to spoil within a few hours and turn into literal rot almost immediately.

So, I was wondering—will your kidney end up in someone who can still enjoy a high-quality life for a while, or is it just going to be a feast for the worms and other critters in the ground?!
You aren't around to see the outcome anyway—so really, it comes down to this: would you rather someone be grateful for the gift of life, or just happy about a decent meal? Honestly, which one sounds better to you—and who would you actually want to be close with? 😬

Patrick Young2 said:If I recall correctly, a family member has to authorize the autopsy or explicitly opt out, but who really knows what goes down behind closed doors.

Going slightly off-topic here, but since we're talking about cutting things open, 😉

I have this one tiny, somewhat superstitious doubt: is it possible for my soul (or whatever essence lingers after death) to return to its own realm if some part of my body is still technically alive? 🤔

No, it doesn't have to be like that because an autopsy is mandatory. You can request specific tests, though even that isn't really up to you.

Grace Richardson24 As stated by:
I suppose we can at least find common ground in the fact that we aren't seeing eye to eye.
An ulcer in the stomach gets cut out, much like a tumor does.
It’s much like undergoing an amputation.
The process essentially involves trimming away the damaged tissue and discarding it, allowing the remaining healthy sections to be fused back together into a single, cohesive unit—whether that results in a smaller structure or one that’s been expanded.
Patching things up is like when you take a deep cut and just use a few quick stitches to close the wound so it doesn't stand out too much.

I’m not entirely sure what your background is, but it's clear you aren't a surgeon. My perforated ulcer was actually "patched up" using the Rosco Graham technique, which essentially involves using my own omentum to cover the perforation.

Grace Richardson24 As stated by:
Even if we’re talking about cosmetic refinements—like trimming excess skin on the stomach or thighs—there is something fundamentally unsettling about "sculpting" nasal cartilage to fix a deviated septum. It feels like you're taking parts of the body that God gave you and deciding they're no longer worthy, discarding them with a sense of disdain.😁 Blasphemy!

I don’t have any excess skin hanging off my stomach (thank God), so there isn't really a need to go under the knife to get rid of it, and I actually turned down that recommended septoplasty. Honestly, they might as well just go ahead and reshape my entire head while they're at it...!!!? Nobody even watched that movie. She ended up choking on her own mucus.

Grace Richardson24 said:It seems we’ve reached a point where we definitely don't see eye to eye.
Stomach ulcers require removal—they get cut out... just like tumors.
That falls under the same umbrella as amputation.
The tissue is excised and discarded, then the healthy part is stitched back together (whether smaller or larger).
"Patching" is what happens when you cut yourself and they use a few stitches to make sure nothing is sticking out.

The surgeries I undergo are purely corrective. Nothing is being put into me, nor is anything being taken out. So, let's not conflate "correction" with "transplantation," "amputation," and so on...

Even if it is a correction—say, removing excess skin on the abdomen or thighs, or "adjusting" nasal cartilage for a deviated septum—that still involves removing parts of the body God gave you, which you're now discarding with such distaste.😁 Blasphemy!

And let's be clear—I'm not lecturing anyone. Everyone has the right to choose, myself included.
But the more people zealously attack my choice without an ounce of respect—all while I respect theirs—the more unshakable my own decision becomes.

You’ve certainly started generalizing everyone who disagrees with you, even though you're the one "correcting" your own body.
It makes it seem like everyone is out to get you, and you're the lone voice whose opinion isn't allowed.

Let's be real—personally, I don't have a strong stance on organ donation.
In other words, once I'm gone, whether some vultures pick me apart or dismantle me to take whatever is useful... it doesn't matter.

However, I might think twice about *receiving* donated organs—purely because of my long history with immunosuppressants and immunomodulation. This damn chemistry.
Without those meds, I’d accept a donated organ in a heartbeat. But this way, I’d have to pass.
Actually, I probably would be a bit of a fool to do it.
When someone is at death's door, they grab at any straw. Most likely, despite all the side effects and risks, they just want to experience "one more birdsong and one more fragrant spring."

I’m not out here making sweeping generalizations. If anything, I make it a point to remind everyone that everyone is entitled to their own perspective. But it feels like I’m just talking to a brick wall.

Grace Richardson24 said:It seems we’ve reached a point where we definitely don't see eye to eye.
Stomach ulcers require removal—they get cut out... just like tumors.
That falls under the same umbrella as amputation.
The tissue is excised and discarded, then the healthy part is stitched back together (whether smaller or larger).
"Patching" is what happens when you cut yourself and they use a few stitches to make sure nothing is sticking out.

The surgeries I undergo are purely corrective. Nothing is being put into me, nor is anything being taken out. So, let's not conflate "correction" with "transplantation," "amputation," and so on...

Even if it is a correction—say, removing excess skin on the abdomen or thighs, or "adjusting" nasal cartilage for a deviated septum—that still involves removing parts of the body God gave you, which you're now discarding with such distaste.😁 Blasphemy!

And let's be clear—I'm not lecturing anyone. Everyone has the right to choose, myself included.
But the more people zealously attack my choice without an ounce of respect—all while I respect theirs—the more unshakable my own decision becomes.

You’ve certainly started generalizing everyone who disagrees with you, even though you're the one "correcting" your own body.
It makes it seem like everyone is out to get you, and you're the lone voice whose opinion isn't allowed.

Let's be real—personally, I don't have a strong stance on organ donation.
In other words, once I'm gone, whether some vultures pick me apart or dismantle me to take whatever is useful... it doesn't matter.

However, I might think twice about *receiving* donated organs—purely because of my long history with immunosuppressants and immunomodulation. This damn chemistry.
Without those meds, I’d accept a donated organ in a heartbeat. But this way, I’d have to pass.
Actually, I probably would be a bit of a fool to do it.
When someone is at death's door, they grab at any straw. Most likely, despite all the side effects and risks, they just want to experience "one more birdsong and one more fragrant spring."

Sure, I make adjustments to my body. Because...
We have truly brilliant surgeons in this country. I honestly hold them in the highest regard; they are individuals who command genuine admiration and respect. It is thanks to their immense knowledge, raw talent, and sheer technical skill that countless people have been snatched back from the very brink of death. I am one of those people. There isn't any way to properly express my gratitude to them for using that expertise to give me a life free from pain today. However, they do have one glaring flaw: a complete lack of aesthetic sensibility. They can quite literally leave a patient looking disfigured on the operating table, patching someone up so poorly that when they finally wake from anesthesia, they feel more frustrated than they did before they ever laid down on the table. Fortunately, Medicare covers the corrective procedures for these unsightly scars, but there is a tragic irony at play here—it essentially forces the patient to undergo the massive risks of further surgery and general anesthesia all over again just to look human.

Grace Richardson24 said:It seems we’ve reached a point where we definitely don't see eye to eye.
Stomach ulcers require removal—they get cut out... just like tumors.
That falls under the same umbrella as amputation.
The tissue is excised and discarded, then the healthy part is stitched back together (whether smaller or larger).
"Patching" is what happens when you cut yourself and they use a few stitches to make sure nothing is sticking out.

The surgeries I undergo are purely corrective. Nothing is being put into me, nor is anything being taken out. So, let's not conflate "correction" with "transplantation," "amputation," and so on...

Even if it is a correction—say, removing excess skin on the abdomen or thighs, or "adjusting" nasal cartilage for a deviated septum—that still involves removing parts of the body God gave you, which you're now discarding with such distaste.😁 Blasphemy!

And let's be clear—I'm not lecturing anyone. Everyone has the right to choose, myself included.
But the more people zealously attack my choice without an ounce of respect—all while I respect theirs—the more unshakable my own decision becomes.

You’ve certainly started generalizing everyone who disagrees with you, even though you're the one "correcting" your own body.
It makes it seem like everyone is out to get you, and you're the lone voice whose opinion isn't allowed.

Let's be real—personally, I don't have a strong stance on organ donation.
In other words, once I'm gone, whether some vultures pick me apart or dismantle me to take whatever is useful... it doesn't matter.

However, I might think twice about *receiving* donated organs—purely because of my long history with immunosuppressants and immunomodulation. This damn chemistry.
Without those meds, I’d accept a donated organ in a heartbeat. But this way, I’d have to pass.
Actually, I probably would be a bit of a fool to do it.
When someone is at death's door, they grab at any straw. Most likely, despite all the side effects and risks, they just want to experience "one more birdsong and one more fragrant spring."

I’ve been on the edge of death a few times myself. There were moments when things got genuinely grim. Yet, not once did I feel the urge to desperately clutch at straws.
Every single time, I just gave myself a little mental shrug and whispered, "God, my life is in Your hands now. Do with it whatever You see fit; I'm perfectly fine with whatever happens."
I essentially hand myself over to the surgeon, ready to wake up cold if that's how the cards fall.
But, having a bit of luck on my side, I always seem to land in the hands of a top-tier surgeon—someone who truly knows their craft—so I invariably wake up from anesthesia feeling perfectly fine.
And that's just how it goes... what's meant to be, will be.
That really gets to the heart of everything I've been trying to say in my previous posts.

As far as I’m concerned, people can take whatever they need... if someone close to me actually needed a kidney, I’d gladly hand one over—I mean, I’ve got two, and you can live a perfectly fine life with just one.

My personal wish? Just cremate me once I'm gone. But maybe give it three days first... I just can't wrap my head around the idea of rotting away in a casket or dealing with worms, so yeah, cremation sounds much better to me. 🙂

darkcyclist212 said:Where can I actually pick up an organ donor card?
I asked my private physician, but he doesn't have any on hand.

Check this link, but legally you just tell your primary care physician and they handle the registration and all that paperwork...

Grace Richardson24 said:I don't know—I’m just thinking out loud here—but once consciousness fades, it’s gone. Now, I know the religious folks will jump in and say it's the soul departing (which is fine by me, even if my own views lean a bit differently)—but that's just how I see it.
All that’s left is a pile of organic matter—which, let's face it, is going to spoil within a few hours and turn into literal rot almost immediately.

So, I was wondering—will your kidney end up in someone who can still enjoy a high-quality life for a while, or is it just going to be a feast for the worms and other critters in the ground?!
You aren't around to see the outcome anyway—so really, it comes down to this: would you rather someone be grateful for the gift of life, or just happy about a decent meal? Honestly, which one sounds better to you—and who would you actually want to be close with? 😬

Legally, we aren't talking about consciousness; we're talking about willpower. Once a person dies, they have no more will. There's zero point in respecting their wishes from when they were alive because that life simply doesn't exist anymore.

melloworca6 said:I think some things are just impossible to wrap your head around until you're actually standing in the middle of it.

Take kidney failure, for example. You’re faced with a choice: spend the rest of your life hooked up to a dialysis machine, or get a transplant. Some people are stuck doing dialysis four times a week. You can't plan anything; your entire existence just revolves around that schedule. Traveling? Forget about it. And don't even get me started on the other complications that come with dialysis. Just the thought of having a catheter shoved into your vein constantly gives me the creeps, and that's just one small part of what these people endure. Imagine being thirsty and not being allowed to drink water whenever you want because your fluid intake is strictly limited between sessions. To me, that sounds like torture. I don't know about you.
If you have a transplanted kidney, you can live a normal life. Sure, you have to watch what you eat, stay on top of your meds, and show up for regular checkups, but your quality of life is worlds better than it was before the transplant when everything was reduced to just home and dialysis.
Look at Klassnić as a current example. The guy played soccer for the national team, traveled the world, had kids—he lived like a normal person thanks to a transplant. I'm sure he preferred that over his situation now, having to deal with dialysis several times a week where everything depends on it. He can't travel easily, and he can't do the big things he used to do when he had that functioning kidney.

And yeah, those organs have an expiration date. If someone asked you if you wanted to die today or in ten years, you'd probably say, "Whatever, let's go with today." Is ten years nothing to you? 🤷 And don't even get me started on when children are involved. No one could tell me they wouldn't dig through dirt with their bare hands and feet—they'd agree to anything just to give a child a fighting chance at life.

Exactly. Even John Paul II said that donating organs is consistent with faith. It's the greatest gift a person can give. So, faith—at least in Christianity—can't be used as an excuse against it.

nimblelynx63 said:Just so we're clear, that donor card doesn't actually carry any legal weight. It was basically just a marketing gimmick from back when they were trying to drum up awareness about organ donation.

In the US, organ donation is governed by the principle of presumed consent. This means you AREN'T officially a donor unless you’ve specifically filed that declaration with your primary care physician.
Before those grief counselors start talking—and honestly, it's because of people like them—doctors who identify potential donors and manage the pre-transplant process NEVER register anyone without sitting down with the family and getting their explicit consent.
So, sure, it's great that you signed the card, but it’s way more important to actually talk to your family and make sure they know exactly what your wishes are.
If anyone here thinks they "heard" or "know" of someone in America having their organs harvested without family permission, feel free to reach out—DM me if you want—and I will gladly help you report that to the proper authorities.

One question for shadownomad43 (respecting your religious and personal views here): during any of your 12 surgeries, or in the recovery periods afterward, did you ever receive blood or blood products? I ask because a transfusion is essentially a form of transplantation in the broader sense.
And thankfully, in the US, awareness regarding transplants has finally started to boost interest in the importance of voluntary blood donation.

By the way, if anyone here who wrote legal articles on this topic is reading, I know a thing or two about this. Legally speaking, a donor card does make you a donor. For everyone, if the card isn't on file, they check the registry to see if they're listed as donors or if they've opted out. That's how they proceed. If there's no record either way, they ask the family, even though they aren't legally forced to.🥱🥱

I agree with you—shadownomad43 is definitely spinning this to suit her own narrative. Twelve corrective surgeries—unless we're talking cosmetic stuff—hardly qualifies as "not extending your life." You didn't just say you're against donation; you said you're against deviating from your "natural life path." Well, if you're so against it, why go under the knife for surgeries meant to keep you going? 🤔

shadownomad43@What would you say to the person in this article?

http://www.nytimes.com/life/health...jAzk4.facebook

Nicole Hughes7 said:shadownomad43@What would you say to the person in this article?

http://www.nytimes.com/life/health...jAzk4.facebook

What would I tell her?
If I were Dr. House, I’d probably just tell her: "Look, honey, your clock has run out."
But since I'm clearly not Dr. House, I’d go with something a bit more human: "Listen, friend, life can be incredibly cruel. Forget about the radiation, skip the chemo, and honestly, screw the whole pharmaceutical industry. Just hold your husband tight, grab your kids by the hands, and soak up every single second left with them..."

As for you, I’ll offer this: there is a curious little psychological quirk tucked away in our brains. It seems that once we finally stop obsessively agonizing over the things that weigh us down, the problem somehow begins to resolve itself.
The power of self-suggestion really does work wonders.

Where on earth is this mandatory registry they keep talking about?

shadownomad43, if we’re going to have a real discussion here, it would be super helpful to know which surgeries you've actually had, what specific illnesses you're dealing with, and exactly what happened during those times you went into cardiac arrest.
Your life, your call! But honestly, it feels a little much when you spend all this energy nitpicking everyone else's choices.