View Full Version : Organ harvesting opt out form.
Singapore's law specifies that 2 qualified doctors can certify a person as brain dead and the organs can be harvested after that. This law applies to PRs also.
I've found a form that you can fill up to opt out of this act. This form is not easy to find, it is not even on Ministry of Health website, so I don't know whether it is valid.
Note: I've not found an electronic way to file this form using Singpass.
http://www.liveon.sg/content/dam/moh_liveon/docs/forms/MOH-010-09-PLC%20Pink.pdf
I thought I read from Sunday newspaper that a Singaporean lady has woken up after many doctors pronounced her as brain dead in Hong Kong hospital but AngMo husband refused to switch off the machine to keep her alive. She was recovered and then discharged in a week though there is complication in her heart. If she was here in Singapore, she was already a dead woman and will never alive and recover fully and healthily since only 2 doctors are required to certify her as brain dead and then can switch off the machine that can keep her alive and remove her organs here! :doh:
MOH has to re-look at the whole situation again since there is already a miracle case!
I better opt out now and let my family to decide for me then.
Singapore's law specifies that 2 qualified doctors can certify a person as brain dead and the organs can be harvested after that. This law applies to PRs also.
I've found a form that you can fill up to opt out of this act. This form is not easy to find, it is not even on Ministry of Health website, so I don't know whether it is valid.
Note: I've not found an electronic way to file this form using Singpass.
http://www.liveon.sg/content/dam/moh_liveon/docs/forms/MOH-010-09-PLC%20Pink.pdf
I thought I read from Sunday newspaper that a Singaporean lady has woken up after many doctors pronounced her as brain dead in Hong Kong hospital but AngMo husband refused to switch off the machine to keep her alive. She was recovered and then discharged in a week though there is complication in her heart. If she was here in Singapore, she was already a dead woman and will never alive and recover fully and healthily since only 2 doctors are required to certify her as brain dead and then can switch off the machine that can keep her alive and remove her organs here! :doh:
MOH has to re-look at the whole situation again since there is already a miracle case!
I better opt out now and let my family to decide for me then.
let's wait for the reporter to clarify her article. i believe there were incorrect terms used in it.
MoH has stated clearly there are several checks to ascertain whether a person is brain dead or in deep coma.
If remember correctly , recently there was a case of the army boy in which the family disputed with the hospital whom were very anxious to harvest the organ...
If remember correctly , recently there was a case of the army boy in which the family disputed with the hospital whom were very anxious to harvest the organ...
cos' someone may be on the brink of death while waiting for organ transplant. time is usually critical and hence, the urgency.
If remember correctly , recently there was a case of the army boy in which the family disputed with the hospital whom were very anxious to harvest the organ...
Maybe someone who is VIP or very rich is waiting for the organ.
Maybe someone who is VIP or very rich is waiting for the organ.
the process is governed strictly by a board of ethics as well. singapore is not china or india
thomastansb
26-03-13, 16:06
Not only in Singapore. Many countries have reported brain dead person waking up.
I am going to opt out for sure. The brain dead diagnosis is crap.
In UK, there were 4 doctors (independent) certifying the patient as "brain dead". But he still woke up. They called it a miracle. I call it medical failure. Just because the equipments are not sensitive enough doesn't mean the brain is dead.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/healthnews/9223408/Miracle-recovery-of-teen-declared-brain-dead-by-four-doctors.html
I thought I read from Sunday newspaper that a Singaporean lady has woken up after many doctors pronounced her as brain dead in Hong Kong hospital but AngMo husband refused to switch off the machine to keep her alive. She was recovered and then discharged in a week though there is complication in her heart. If she was here in Singapore, she was already a dead woman and will never alive and recover fully and healthily since only 2 doctors are required to certify her as brain dead and then can switch off the machine that can keep her alive and remove her organs here! :doh:
MOH has to re-look at the whole situation again since there is already a miracle case!
I better opt out now and let my family to decide for me then.
Not only in Singapore. Many countries have reported brain dead person waking up.
I am going to opt out for sure. The brain dead diagnosis is crap.
In UK, there were 4 doctors (independent) certifying the patient as "brain dead". But he still woke up. They called it a miracle. I call it medical failure. Just because the equipments are not sensitive enough doesn't mean the brain is dead.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/healthnews/9223408/Miracle-recovery-of-teen-declared-brain-dead-by-four-doctors.html
erm in the article, the crash victim was not brain dead. he was merely in a coma but the doctors just proclaimed he can't recover. this is bordering medical negligence liao.
cos' someone may be on the brink of death while waiting for organ transplant. time is usually critical and hence, the urgency.
The intention is good, also in a double edge sword, the 'presumed brain dead' life is taken to save another ...depend on where u stand and perspective ,
But the doctors had a very hard call for this certification...
The intention is good, also in a double edge sword, the 'presumed brain dead' life is taken to save another ...depend on where u stand and perspective ,
But the doctors had a very hard call for this certification...
difficult decision meh?
if dont do anything and brain dead stay alive, only hospital earn the money.
if can perform organ transplant, doctor also can earn money.
er....what difficult call are you talking about?
I better be safe than sorry.:p
The intention is good, also in a double edge sword, the 'presumed brain dead' life is taken to save another ...depend on where u stand and perspective ,
But the doctors had a very hard call for this certification...
The intention is good, also in a double edge sword, the 'presumed brain dead' life is taken to save another ...depend on where u stand and perspective ,
But the doctors had a very hard call for this certification...
technically, it cannot be considered taking a live to save another. the brain-dead person is legally dead. you can be assured that the medical and legal community have developed stringent safeguards, not this is not restricted only to singapore.
since we are on this touchy topic of taking a life, then should abortion be considered as murder? the act is truly a destruction of life by another.
Brain Death
In traditional Western medical practice, death was defined as the cessation of the body's circulatory and respiratory (blood pumping and breathing) functions. With the invention of machines that provide artificial circulation and respiration that definition has ceased to be practical and has been modified to include another category of death called brain death. People can now be kept alive using such machines even when their brains have effectively died and are no longer able to control their bodily functions. Moreover, in certain medical procedures, such as open-heart surgery, individuals do not breathe or pump blood on their own. Since it would be wrong to declare as dead all persons whose circulatory or respiratory systems are temporarily maintained by artificial means (a category that includes many patients undergoing surgery), the medical community has determined that an individual may be declared dead if brain death has occurred—that is, if the whole brain has ceased to function, or has entered what is sometimes called a persistent vegetative state. An individual whose brain stem (lower brain) has died is not able to maintain the vegetative functions of life, including respiration, circulation, and swallowing. According to the Uniform Determination of Death Act (§ 1, U.L.A. [1980]), from which most states have developed their brain death statutes, "An individual who has sustained either (1) irreversible cessation of circulatory and respiratory function, or (2) irreversible cessation of all functions of the entire brain, including the brain stem, is dead."
Brain death becomes a crucial issue in part because of the importance of organ transplants. A brain-dead person may have organs—a heart, a liver, and lungs, for example—that could save other people's lives. And for an individual to be an acceptable organ donor, he or she must be dead but still breathing and circulating blood. If a brain-dead person is maintained on artificial respiration until his or her heart fails, then these usable organs would perish. Thus, the medical category of brain death makes it possible to accomplish another goal: saving lives with organ transplants.
There is ethical play here. Odds are against the affected patient. All the more I should opt out.:scared-4:
difficult decision meh?
if dont do anything and brain dead stay alive, only hospital earn the money.
if can perform organ transplant, doctor also can earn money.
er....what difficult call are you talking about?
There is ethical play here. Odds are against the affected patient. All the more I should opt out.:scared-4:
you can trust that there is an entire board of ethics to safeguard patient safety
difficult decision meh?
if dont do anything and brain dead stay alive, only hospital earn the money.
if can perform organ transplant, doctor also can earn money.
er....what difficult call are you talking about?
I believe hospital will more willing to discharge patient , if possible and let family take over consideration of bed vacancy running low.
The difficult part is to proclaim brain dead le..both technically and ethnically..
I believe hospital will more willing to discharge patient , if possible and let family take over consideration of bed vacancy running low.
The difficult part is to proclaim brain dead le..
Organ transplant is $ for the hospital and doctors.
It is a double-edge sword if you opt out.
you can trust that there is an entire board of ethics to safeguard patient safety
i only trust
1) the fact that human beings act in their self interest.
2) doctors very very rarely testify against their colleagues.
and in organ transplant, there are 2 patients.
the "brain-dead patient" and the "patient waiting for organ transplant".
I do trust that the entire board of ethics will safeguard the "patient waiting for organ transplant"'s interests.
usually 1 brain-dead can "donate" organs to several patients.
the mathematics say kill 1 to save a few.
donate cornea, eye specialist earn money
donate kidney, kidney specialist earn money.
donate liver, liver specialist earn money.
donate heart, heart specialist earn money.
The odds are indeed against the brain-dead.
ps:
LKY once said nothing is free, so how come the donor and family dont earn money from organ transplant?
I believe hospital will more willing to discharge patient , if possible and let family take over consideration of bed vacancy running low.
The difficult part is to proclaim brain dead le..both technically and ethnically..
it's a checklist of 7 safeguards, if i remember correctly. fail any single one and the patient cannot be declared brain dead. the hard part is communicating to the family and persuading them to let the hospital harvest the organs
hospital cannot discharge a brain-dead patient. pull the plug, respiratory and circulatory function stops immediately.
i only trust
1) the fact that human beings act in their self interest.
2) doctors very very rarely testify against their colleagues.
and in organ transplant, there are 2 patients.
the "brain-dead patient" and the "patient waiting for organ transplant".
I do trust that the board of ethics will safeguard the "patient waiting for organ transplant"'s interests.
usually 1 brain-dead can "donate" organs to several patients.
the mathematics say kill 1 to save a few.
donate cornea, eye specialist earn money
donate kidney, kidney specialist earn money.
donate liver, liver specialist earn money.
donate heart, heart specialist earn money.
The odds are indeed against the brain-dead.
ps:
LKY once said nothing is free, so how come the donor and family dont earn money from organ transplant?
erm, it is compulsory to have non-doctors (there is a specific composition - e.g. at least 1 lawyer and 1 religious person) on the board of ethics.
and to add on, the donor doesn't get money because it is a donation. the moment money comes in, then ethics get blurred. moreover, it is illegal to have monetary transactions of organs - i.e. organ trafficking is illegal
hence, singapore law guards patient's safety adequately.
technically, it cannot be considered taking a live to save another. the brain-dead person is legally dead. you can be assured that the medical and legal community have developed stringent safeguards, not this is not restricted only to singapore.
since we are on this touchy topic of taking a life, then should abortion be considered as murder? the act is truly a destruction of life by another.
Errmmm.. Properly am assured that there are check/process/procedure in place ..
..but trust , on the judgement , is another matter especially if you are the immediate family whom will fight for every possible chance or miracles or divine intervention
...
for all who are uncomfortable with the article, i plead with you to wait for clarifications before deciding to opt out.
at least, please speak to a MoH counsellor first to understand your rights before acting rashly. organ transplants save lives
Errmmm.. Properly am assured that there are check/process/procedure in place ..
..but trust , on the judgement , is another matter especially if you are the immediate family whom will fight for every possible chance or miracles or divine intervention
...
once the brain is dead, you've already moved on into the afterlife. brain-dead is different from being in a vegetative state or coma - the latter can recover
I better be safe than sorry.:p
I am lagi kai sia....
if pulling the ventilator on brain-dead patient is already a no-no, then what about abortion??
i regard that as a bigger evil
and to add on, the donor doesn't get money because it is a donation. the moment money comes in, then ethics get blurred. moreover, it is illegal to have monetary transactions of organs - i.e. organ trafficking is illegal
hence, singapore law guards patient's safety adequately.
so who pay for removing or transferring out the organs?
for all who are uncomfortable with the article, i plead with you to wait for clarifications before deciding to opt out.
at least, please speak to a MoH counsellor first to understand your rights before acting rashly. organ transplants save lives
Sound advise.... Appreciate that...
so who pay for removing or transferring out the organs?
i'm not privy to how the hospital finance system works. logically speaking, it should be borne by the recipient of the organ/s
Sound advise.... Appreciate that...
you're welcome.
i'm more concerned of the public reacting negatively to the news. if we imagine the forum as a microcosm of the society, at least there is a rational discussion here. what about the less educated who have no access to information?
if everyone opts out of the HOTA act, then kidney, heart, cornea, liver, lung, skin failure patients are going to suffer or die waiting for one
waterviewer88
26-03-13, 17:22
Singapore's law specifies that 2 qualified doctors can certify a person as brain dead and the organs can be harvested after that. This law applies to PRs also.
I've found a form that you can fill up to opt out of this act. This form is not easy to find, it is not even on Ministry of Health website, so I don't know whether it is valid.
Note: I've not found an electronic way to file this form using Singpass.
http://www.liveon.sg/content/dam/moh_liveon/docs/forms/MOH-010-09-PLC%20Pink.pdf
Here's the link on moh website -
http://www.moh.gov.sg/content/moh_web/home/legislation/legislation_and_guidelines/human_organ_transplantact.html
I opt out, it does not mean that my organs are not eventually donated to the patients. I'm with Hopeful la and have seen many cases of mishaps la though there are already many sound process and mechanism in place.
To protect my own interest, I'll opt out for my family to decide when to switch off supporting life machine instead of letting the so called board to decide for me. I'll let my family to donate my organs provided they are still in good functionable condition.:D
you're welcome.
i'm more concerned of the public reacting negatively to the news. if we imagine the forum as a microcosm of the society, at least there is a rational discussion here. what about the less educated who have no access to information?
if everyone opts out of the HOTA act, then kidney, heart, cornea, liver, lung, skin failure patients are going to suffer or die waiting for one
erm, it is compulsory to have non-doctors (there is a specific composition - e.g. at least 1 lawyer and 1 religious person) on the board of ethics.
and to add on, the donor doesn't get money because it is a donation. the moment money comes in, then ethics get blurred. moreover, it is illegal to have monetary transactions of organs - i.e. organ trafficking is illegal
hence, singapore law guards patient's safety adequately.
lawyer and religious person are non-technical person. they will go along with the flow. doctors will tell them, have to harvest at optimum time, if not, organs are not fresh, and the poor patients waiting for organs will suffer longer.
Given this kind of pressure and reasoning, you think lawyer and religious person will go against the doctors?
doctors earn fees from organ transplants. they have incentive to see a person declare "brain-dead".
The person waiting for organ transplants also have want to see a person declare "brain-dead". if not, how to have organ for transplant.
the only person who don't benefit is the "brain-dead" and the family itself.
so what ethics are we talking about here?
if family of brain-dead can earn money, then i have no objection.
myself at least want my family to be compensated if my organs are harvested.
i am a product of pap, when i am alive, i have to pay and pay, now you want my organs for free? fxxk off. you want my organs, you better pay for it.
i only trust 1 thing, "people act in self-interests".
some members of govt, rich, the elites will need organ transplants in future, they need supply. hence they pass hota now.
if many people opt out of hota, the better, then they will legalise the sale of organs to ensure their own supply of organs.
There's something known as NDE, in which a person is brain dead, see his or her own body from a distance and then re-enters the body and is resuscitated.
http://www.near-death.com/experiences/evidence01.html
When all of Pam's vital signs were stopped, the doctor turned on a surgical saw and began to cut through Pam's skull. While this was going on, Pam reported that she felt herself "pop" outside her body and hover above the operating table. Then she watched the doctors working on her lifeless body for awhile. From her out-of-body position, she observed the doctor sawing into her skull with what looked to her like an electric toothbrush. Pam heard and reported later what the nurses in the operating room had said and exactly what was happening during the operation. At this time, every monitor attached to Pam's body registered "no life" whatsoever. At some point, Pam's consciousness floated out of the operating room and traveled down a tunnel which had a light at the end of it where her deceased relatives and friends were waiting including her long-dead grandmother. Pam's NDE ended when her deceased uncle led her back to her body for her to reentered it. Pam compared the feeling of reentering her dead body to "plunging into a pool of ice." The following is Pam Reynolds' account of her NDE in her own words.
it's a checklist of 7 safeguards, if i remember correctly. fail any single one and the patient cannot be declared brain dead. the hard part is communicating to the family and persuading them to let the hospital harvest the organs
hospital cannot discharge a brain-dead patient. pull the plug, respiratory and circulatory function stops immediately.
If the family die die want to stop the doctors, how? Are they guilty under the law?
If the family die die want to stop the doctors, how? Are they guilty under the law?
It is against the law to do that. I don't believe anyone has succeeded to stop the doctors because the police will be called in.
Is there a VIP in waiting??? :o
difficult decision meh?
if dont do anything and brain dead stay alive, only hospital earn the money.
if can perform organ transplant, doctor also can earn money.
er....what difficult call are you talking about?
How will they know anybody jump queue? They don't do the registration and follow the paperwork everyday right? :beats-me-man:
erm, it is compulsory to have non-doctors (there is a specific composition - e.g. at least 1 lawyer and 1 religious person) on the board of ethics.
What are the implications of opting out of HOTA?
(http://forums.condosingapore.com/)
Anyone who opts out of HOTA receives lower priority for receiving an organ on the national waiting list should he require an organ transplant in the future. This will be specific to the organs which he opted out of.
http://www.pqms.moh.gov.sg/apps/fcd_faqmain.aspx?qst=2fN7e274RAp%2bbUzLdEL%2fmJu3ZDKARR3p5Nl92FNtJie8pByIMium%2b96IFsmAcEka%2bpIKxFLl%2bbsTxHVE3%2fpFsXIkii%2bakrP9JvTq0g9m%2fgz6kkbcvQptk23HEACXM9FNn0UQqJ%2fPlcO17qN9e7L%2b43g4GT9QiZGWWvdvoB4Vi%2bNy6oZpxAfJtcAR%2fEIKqmp2YAozrd9VgIg%3d
lawyer and religious person are non-technical person. they will go along with the flow. doctors will tell them, have to harvest at optimum time, if not, organs are not fresh, and the poor patients waiting for organs will suffer longer.
Given this kind of pressure and reasoning, you think lawyer and religious person will go against the doctors?
doctors earn fees from organ transplants. they have incentive to see a person declare "brain-dead".
The person waiting for organ transplants also have want to see a person declare "brain-dead". if not, how to have organ for transplant.
the only person who don't benefit is the "brain-dead" and the family itself.
so what ethics are we talking about here?
if family of brain-dead can earn money, then i have no objection.
myself at least want my family to be compensated if my organs are harvested.
i am a product of pap, when i am alive, i have to pay and pay, now you want my organs for free? fxxk off. you want my organs, you better pay for it.
i only trust 1 thing, "people act in self-interests".
some members of govt, rich, the elites will need organ transplants in future, they need supply. hence they pass hota now.
if many people opt out of hota, the better, then they will legalise the sale of organs to ensure their own supply of organs.
trust me, the non-medical persons are on board to ensure the case isn't viewed from a medical point of view and the diversity helps safeguard patients. the ethics ensure there is no monetary inducement or undue coercion, apart from meeting the technical criteria of being brain dead.
if you choose to believe there isn't good in man, i won't be able to convince you otherwise. like i said earlier, wait for clarifications or speak to a MoH counsellor or even a physician to know better.
How will they know anybody jump queue? They don't do the registration and follow the paperwork everyday right? :beats-me-man:
anyone who needs an organ transplant will be put on a queue, and there are specific criteria that may push one to the front. MoH maintains the lists
If the family die die want to stop the doctors, how? Are they guilty under the law?
i believe there is a court case that is ongoing between changi general and a family. the hospital turned off the ventilator against the family wishes, in spite of being told that the patient is brain dead.
i don't think a verdict has been reached yet. on a personal stand, i don't think that the hospital did the right thing, even though i'm a supporter of the HOTA act.
so on the topic of ethics, anyone care to discuss about abortion?
so on the topic of ethics, anyone care to discuss about abortion?
i am pro abortion. if not how to get dumplings like in 3 extremes show?
anyway, my child need a bone marrow, so i asked my wife to have another baby, so the younger sibling can donate the marrow to the child.
unfortunately i am poor, can raise only 1 child. so what do i do, i abort the baby, use its (not he, not she) marrow transplant for my existing child.
http://www.today.com/id/43265160/ns/today-good_news/t/born-save-sisters-life-shes-glad-i-am-family/
i am pro abortion. if not how to get dumplings like in 3 extremes show?
anyway, my child need a bone marrow, so i asked my wife to have another baby, so the younger sibling can donate the marrow to the child.
unfortunately i am poor, can raise only 1 child. so what do i do, i abort the baby, use its (not he, not she) marrow transplant for my existing child.
http://www.today.com/id/43265160/ns/today-good_news/t/born-save-sisters-life-shes-glad-i-am-family/
what's "get dumplings like in 3 extremes show"???
should a fetus be considered as an "it"? it is a living thing for sure, and to rob it for its right to live is.......? in that story, the baby was brought to full term and cared for in the family - no abortion.
to me, abortion has far-worse ethical implications than pulling the plug of a brain-dead
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dumplings_%28film%29
for myself and wife at least, no ethical problem to abort foetus that are abnormal.
physical abnormalities depends on cost and whether it can be corrected.
expensive surgery like hole-in-heart = abort
cannot be corrected physical defects like missing limbs = abort.
cheap surgery for hair-lip = can live.
genetic abnormalities generally abort.
down syndrome = abort
blood disorder like thalassemia = can live
heck, when we grow old, we expect children to take care of us, not we continue taking care of this down syndrome child.
the problem for me and wife is autism. only when child is a few years old, then can detect. by then, have emotional bond with child already.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.2 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.