This is the sadest article I could possibly read. With so many people in need and so many healthy organs going to rot in graves- what sort of love- especially Christian love is represented by this selfishness? People are fearful of donating anyway- who would want to falsely encourage such fear? I will fight it.

I told my story on another article here once before but it bears repeating for all of our sick friends and neighbours around the world. I was in exactly the 'dangerous' position that is described by the author. EXCEPT it is neuroscientists who save and prevent anyone from facing such problems.

I took my stance on this after the organs of not one but two beloved teenagers ended up in the grave due to catastrophic accidents- one on a ski slope and another, 6 weeks later in a car accident. Two young men in the prime of life with strong healthy organs and there is NOTHING of them left except nice memories. They would willingly have helped at least 8 people each with organs that were left to rot and help no one and WE would have the comfort of knowing that at least part of them survived. All of my children and I decided then that when our lives would end it would NOT BE without benefit to someone.

Last December I went into a hospital for a spinal surgery and during recovery an error by staff caused my cerebral fluid to drain off, which ultimately sucked my brain downward into my spinal canal- tearing my brainstem. This normally results in death but my son and the alert Neurosurgeon he contacted saved my life. Even though I was an IDEAL candidate (a brain injury sustained in a hospital- all forms not only signed in advance but confirmed on my license and online and by mailed in confirmation and all my kids informed and in agreement AND a nonsmoker, nondrinker) NO ONE ever approached me or anyone else to harvest my organs.

Almost NO ONE ever survives such an event. My family doc says that there are probably 3 in the world and STILL no one gave up on me. No one expected me to live. No one had any hope of my recovery and yet here I am. My forms are still signed. and let me tell you most sincerely that if had gone to the great beyond and looked down to discover my carcass was rotting when I could have alievated some suffering- I would have been SERIOUSLY TICKED Off1

My comment is in relation to the photo of a surgeon contained within this article. There is no way that you put on a mask AFTER you have scrubbed and donned your sterile surgical gloves. The mask is not sterile and is put on BEFORE you scrub. If the photo you have chosen is faulty, then I suspect that some of the detail in the aricle is likewise.

Oh jeeeez, not another health scare campaign promoted by an individual with no medical qualifications whatsoever--"to each his own trade". It will probable get plenty of traction in the MSM and on the Net, unfortunately.

Does the Catholic church have an ideological problem with organ donation?

Oh alright I will act as the dissenter here. But a few things first. 1. I'm not (invariably) against the use of brain death as a criteria for death. 2. I am not against organ donations as such. 3. I am an atheist.

Even so, I think this is a very odd and defensive little article.
There are in fact some quite legitimate questions to ask about our use of central brain cessation (brain death) to diagnose death and I am greatly surprised that an ethicist should put the view that “we” are unable to intelligently discuss such matters because we lack the “expertise” of a Neurologist. With all due respect to the writer, surely it precisely the job of an ethicist to make such discussions intelligible to the rest of “us”.

In any case, one does not need such expertise to be able to assess the argument between Nicholas Tonti-Filippini and ANZICS and supporters. While I am no fan of Tonti-Filippini's position, both ANZIC and the writer appear to beg the question against him.

I also find the uncritical acceptance of the 'good' of organ donation and the immediate appeal to emotion (“families refusing to honour their loved one’s wish” “putting at risk the lives of critically ill people”) disconcerting. There is in fact a very serious discussion that society needs to have about certain forms of organ donation. Sometimes organ donation does little more than prolong dying (there's that problematic concept again), we do this at vast (unsustainable?) expense and use of resources that might go elsewhere. The practice sometimes gives rise to intensely difficult issues of equity or dubious benefits and so on and so on. For those who cannot image the relevance of such issues – perhaps try to consider the case of Kerry Packer. Is it acceptable that some can buy organs? Is it wise for society use its limited resources in rescuing a person who really is (dying) anyway?.. And so on.

True Australia does have a low donation rate. But maybe there are good (or not) reasons for this. No-one lives for ever.

I have not read the book but query Katrina Bramstets' own "emotive oration", see below exert from her article for one example.

"But Tonti-Filippini’s latest claims seem merely a lightening rod of emotive oration. Along the way, patients with end-stage organ failure potentially endure more suffering as their waiting time for an organ increases."

'On the way' to what Katrina? People discussing the issues raised by this bloke? Or people investigating (the average person is not an idiot as you so arrogantly assume) doctors claims their loved ones are in fact 'brain dead'? This is a serious issue that needs serious discussion by the whole community, not just medico's. The community must maintain control of this important issue, and not leave it up to the medical fraternity to tell us what to think and why. Cat Mack raises good points.