The number of people who are badly in need of an organ transplant is getting closer to 100,000… The number of people who are badly in need of an organ transplant is getting closer to 100,000 each year. With only 20,000 donations recorded for 2004, some people have seen a possible solution in a system that has been running smoothly in European countries for years.

Presumed consent is a statute that involves adding one’s name to a registry operated by the government. It also gives physicians the right to assume that people with driver’s licenses that confirm their donor status want to donate unless there is any documentation to suggest otherwise – and not the testimony of a relative or a loved one.

The increasing number of people who die each year waiting for organs that never come has driven support for presumed consent.

The greatest advantage of presumed consent is the convenience of a decisive registry that can be immediately accessible to physicians in these often-urgent situations. Furthermore, studies conducted by Harvard University and University of Chicago observed presumed consent has a positive effect on donation.

It seems that this isn’t solely an issue of the paucity of organs that have the ability to extend the life of someone who would otherwise die, but of whether or not families can override adult decisions.

The main conflict occurs in the difference of age one is able to operate a motor vehicle, roughly 16, and the age one is considered a consenting adult, 18. If you are legally entrusted to operate a motor vehicle, why should you not be entrusted to make a decision about your life?

While this isn’t to suggest that age limitations are drawn without rhyme or reason, it seems there is a significant difference to be considered between the competence of a 16-year old and an 18-year old.

Like many proposals, there are drawbacks. Because of the complexity of presumed consent, there would have to be a conclusive, well-equipped program designed to educate the public on signing up for the registry and their choices in terms of opting out.

Some proposals that are also being reviewed are considering the organs of the obese or elderly and taking out organs when the heart stops as opposed to only when someone’s brain has ceased functioning. While these are simply suggestions, the costs of these proposals don’t seem to compete with the benefits of presumed consent.

Another proposal includes offering monetary rewards or gifts to the family to compensate for the donation. In some ways this is tantamount to selling one’s organs and probably won’t be well received in the hour of losing a loved one.

If this ever does come to pass, one’s license should always be considered above all. In the event of an extenuating circumstance, the family should only be able to override if the potential donor is under the age of 18.

In the end it will make everyone a little happier if we all do our part to recognize the importance of having proper documentation of your decision, in the event you are unable to make one.