will not donate organs. So, others that do believe in donating organs should donate in order to make up for the decrease in available donors.
Further, investigated by Randhawa and others, the results showed that no particular religion was against organ donation. Some belief groups gave their opinions on organ donation, “there is no objection to Baha’is either donating their organs or receiving donated organs. Hinduism has always supported organ donation. There is no particular Jewish position on organs” (Randhawa et al. 746). Many other responses were made by a variety of different belief holders. Although, it has been stated that there is diversity in the Islamic community. Some of the selected Muslims supported organ donation while others …show more content…
This is said because if people do not know what organ donation is, or they are unsure what they believe, then how can we expect them to vote to change to an opt-out system? Thus, they would refute the opt-in policy once they are fully informed about the benefits of on opt-out system as well. Often times people refute organ donation out of fear, if they become more aware of the process and the benefits then it would help them become a donor. There have already been ways in which social media has tried to influence the population to donate organs. Although, these methods “fail to adequately pique the audience’s attention in a way that moves them to action” (Feeley and Kruegler 176). “Changing the attitudes of people towards organ donation through public communication campaigns helps to increase the number of people who are willing to donate their organs after their death” (Lauri 663). “Campaigns are more successful in registering donors than are mass-mediated campaigns” (Feeley and Kruegler 177). In order to create change, people first have to see that there is a problem, and be able to relate that to their lives. Then, they have to understand that they can make a difference. Action can be done, by supporting an out-out policy or if still in an out-in policy, then, put their name on the donor list. “Information is required to educate or inform audiences, …show more content…
There are ways to make sure that autonomy is respected in a deceased individual. Many people say they are in support of organ donation but never put their name on the organ list. Therefore, in an opt-out system it would ensure that the people who want to be on the list are. Having an increase in organ donation, takes more than just switching to an opt-out system. There needs to be a good legislation in order for the opt-out policy to be beneficial. For the countries who have an opt-out system, it has been beneficial in increase the number of organ donors with success. Also, with medical advances in medical science the number of people who can be saved through organ donation is rapidly increasing. In conclusion, with properly establishing an opt-out system, the amount of organs donated can be increased. Which, is important because, “more than 8,000 patients waiting for an organ transplant and 1,000 a year die without receiving the organ that could save their lives.” (Lauri 647). Therefore, it would be beneficial for the United States to switch to an opt-out organ
Further, investigated by Randhawa and others, the results showed that no particular religion was against organ donation. Some belief groups gave their opinions on organ donation, “there is no objection to Baha’is either donating their organs or receiving donated organs. Hinduism has always supported organ donation. There is no particular Jewish position on organs” (Randhawa et al. 746). Many other responses were made by a variety of different belief holders. Although, it has been stated that there is diversity in the Islamic community. Some of the selected Muslims supported organ donation while others …show more content…
This is said because if people do not know what organ donation is, or they are unsure what they believe, then how can we expect them to vote to change to an opt-out system? Thus, they would refute the opt-in policy once they are fully informed about the benefits of on opt-out system as well. Often times people refute organ donation out of fear, if they become more aware of the process and the benefits then it would help them become a donor. There have already been ways in which social media has tried to influence the population to donate organs. Although, these methods “fail to adequately pique the audience’s attention in a way that moves them to action” (Feeley and Kruegler 176). “Changing the attitudes of people towards organ donation through public communication campaigns helps to increase the number of people who are willing to donate their organs after their death” (Lauri 663). “Campaigns are more successful in registering donors than are mass-mediated campaigns” (Feeley and Kruegler 177). In order to create change, people first have to see that there is a problem, and be able to relate that to their lives. Then, they have to understand that they can make a difference. Action can be done, by supporting an out-out policy or if still in an out-in policy, then, put their name on the donor list. “Information is required to educate or inform audiences, …show more content…
There are ways to make sure that autonomy is respected in a deceased individual. Many people say they are in support of organ donation but never put their name on the organ list. Therefore, in an opt-out system it would ensure that the people who want to be on the list are. Having an increase in organ donation, takes more than just switching to an opt-out system. There needs to be a good legislation in order for the opt-out policy to be beneficial. For the countries who have an opt-out system, it has been beneficial in increase the number of organ donors with success. Also, with medical advances in medical science the number of people who can be saved through organ donation is rapidly increasing. In conclusion, with properly establishing an opt-out system, the amount of organs donated can be increased. Which, is important because, “more than 8,000 patients waiting for an organ transplant and 1,000 a year die without receiving the organ that could save their lives.” (Lauri 647). Therefore, it would be beneficial for the United States to switch to an opt-out organ