Indy Posted May 7, 2013 Posted May 7, 2013 A ni ovakvi uzasi ne pomazu. Transplant patients died from donor's diseaseA Victorian coroner has found that three women who received organs from the same donor all died of the same rare disease.The women all had transplants at various hospitals in Melbourne.They received organs from a 57-year-old man who died of a brain haemorrhage.All three women died within a month of their transplants.A coroner found they died of a virus called lymphocytic choriomeningitis or LCMV, a rare rodent-borne infectious disease.The court was told the virus had not previously been seen in Victoria and has not been seen since.In her findings, the coroner said there should be no reason for people to lose faith in the organ donor program.The court recommended there needs to be greater communication between hospitals and patient families, saying bad communication was an issue consistently raised.
Amelija Posted May 7, 2013 Posted May 7, 2013 jedini razlog sto nisam zavestao je sto sam previse lenj da se iscimam. hvala drzavi sto ce da obavi to umesto mene.+1bwt u Belgiji je isto tako (moraš da obavestiš ako nećeš a ne ako hoćeš)
Indy Posted May 7, 2013 Posted May 7, 2013 (edited) Hm, ja i dalje ne vidim kako je to sto je to automatsko prednost u odnosu na prosto stikliranje kucice sa "DA" prilikom vadjenja obaveznih dokumenata, kao sto je u Srbiji recimo licna karta. (Slazem se da je negiranje ove volje od strane familije, sto je slucaj sa Australijom, manjkavo). Valjda sam jednostavno protiv davanja bilo kakvih default prava drzavi, cak i ako su "visi interesi" u pitanju. Malo mi je cudno da ispada da sam totalno usamljen u ovom pogledu medju onima koji su ovde izrazili 1 misljenje. Edited May 7, 2013 by Indy
nera Posted May 7, 2013 Posted May 7, 2013 Ja takodje spadam u grupu onih koji samo iz lenjosti nemaju donatorsku karticu. Sto se mene tice, kad dodjem do kraja puta, sve sto se moze iskoristiti neka uzmu, ostalo da spale i to je to. Pade mi na pamet da mozda jednog dana sastavim testament sa naglaskom da familija ne moze da negira moje doniranje organa, mada nisam sigurna da je to opcija.Mene zanima druga stvar, delimicno povezana sa donacijom organa, receno mi je, od ljudi koji su imali nesrecu da im bliznji zavrse na aparatima za odrzavanje zivota, da se kod nas ne dozvoljava iskljucivanje aparata jer nije u skladu sa pravoslavnom crkvom, tj. crkva to ne dozvoljava, vec mora da se ceka da taj neko umre sam od sebe?! U oba slucaja, njima je tako receno u bolnici. (naravno, niko ne zeli da dodje u tu situaciju da odlucuje, oni su samo preneli sta im je receno). Zna li neko ima li takvo pravilo i za uzimanje organa?Mislim da se kod nas, po obicaju, ide linijom manjeg otpora ovakvim predlogom. Moguce da smatraju da je lakse da uvedu pravilo da su svi donatori osim ako ne naglase suprotno nego da edukuju ljude i tako privuku vise donatora. Uostalom, i lakse je, tj. brze, ako je potrebno za ukljucivanje u medjunarodne tokove transplantacije. Proglasis svo stanovnistvo za potencijalne donatore i resen problem.Banalizujem i generalizujem, ali tako mi deluje.
wall Posted May 7, 2013 Posted May 7, 2013 Mislim da ovo sa aparatima i on/off nije tačno.Jedna tužna priča da sada ne tupim, no čekali su određeni datum...
Joe D Posted May 7, 2013 Posted May 7, 2013 Hm, ja i dalje ne vidim kako je to sto je to automatsko prednost u odnosu na prosto stikliranje kucice sa "DA" prilikom vadjenja obaveznih dokumenata, kao sto je u Srbiji recimo licna karta. (Slazem se da je negiranje ove volje od strane familije, sto je slucaj sa Australijom, manjkavo). Valjda sam jednostavno protiv davanja bilo kakvih default prava drzavi, cak i ako su "visi interesi" u pitanju. Malo mi je cudno da ispada da sam totalno usamljen u ovom pogledu medju onima koji su ovde izrazili 1 misljenje.u principu, nije bolje, ali u raksi verujem da ce dati vise rezultata. realno ce vecina ljudi kad to vidi odbiti da stiklira, dok ce ovako barem svi biti primorani da se informisu i steknu neki stav o tome, pre nego sto odluce da ne zele da bilo ko raspolaze njihovim organima. ne vidim ni sta je problematicno u tome da drzava po difoltu raspolaze pravom na organe pokojnika, mada jeste nesto sto moze da bude kontroverzno i zahteva neku javnu debatu.
Indy Posted May 7, 2013 Posted May 7, 2013 Okej, ovde mi se misljenje dosta ostro razlikuje od vecine. Drzave obozavaju da mogu po defaultu nesto rade, bez da ista pitaju te smarajuce gradjane koji ih placaju... tako da treba biti oprezan sa time.
Joe D Posted May 7, 2013 Posted May 7, 2013 (edited) ali ja ne vidim kako ovo moze biti bilo kako ovo daje drzavi vecu moc nad gradjanima i kako moze biti upotrebljeno protiv njih, stoga zaista nemam problema sa tim.a kako ti mislis da drzava treba da ukljuci gradjane u donosenje ovakvih odluka? jedino moze da se raspise referendum, ali mislim da je to zaista nepotrebno za ovakvu stvar. Edited May 7, 2013 by Joe D
Indy Posted May 7, 2013 Posted May 7, 2013 Pa, ne znam sta vise da kazem. Uglavnom, evo tim pitanjem se bave npr. u UK. I zakljucili su The resulting report The potential impact of an opt out system for organ donation in the UK was delivered in November 2008. It recommended that the current system of opt-in be retained...Ovaj link gore ne valja, cela studija tj. izvestaj je ovde: http://www.ics.ac.uk/the_potential_impact_of_an_opt_out_system_to_organ_donation_in_the_ukNesto kao zakljucak:Taskforce members had a wide range of views at theoutset. however, after examining the evidence, theTaskforce reached a clear consensus inrecommending that an opt out system should notbe introduced in the uK at the present time. TheTaskforce concluded that such a system has thepotential to undermine the concept of donation asa gift, to erode trust in nhs professionals and thegovernment, and negatively impact on organdonation numbers. it would distract attention awayfrom essential improvements to systems andinfrastructure and from the urgent need to improvepublic awareness and understanding of organdonation. furthermore, it would be challenging andcostly to implement successfully. most compelling ofall, we found no convincing evidence that it woulddeliver signicant increases in the number ofdonated organs. (Ko ima vremena, moze da pogleda ovo, zakljucak je u stvari iznenadjujuci i kontraintuitivan).
nera Posted May 7, 2013 Posted May 7, 2013 Okej, ovde mi se misljenje dosta ostro razlikuje od vecine. Drzave obozavaju da mogu po defaultu nesto rade, bez da ista pitaju te smarajuce gradjane koji ih placaju... tako da treba biti oprezan sa time.Ja se u potpunosti slazem sa tobom sa te strane.No, samo spekulisem zasto ovakav potez. Bila je prica, kad se digla frka oko one devojcice kojoj je potrebna transplantacija srca, da Srbija nije u sistemu (evropskom?) za dodelu organa jer imamo jako mali broj donatora, i da je to jedan od razloga zasto nasi pacijenti imaju problem sa tim. Zato sam pretpostavila da su smislili cunning plan kako da odjenom postanemo veliki donatori. Ako ima neko strucniji da bolje objasni bilo bi super.
Indy Posted May 7, 2013 Posted May 7, 2013 (edited) A evo sta su Britanci nasli da je problem sa uvodjenjem opt-outa: Were an opt out system to be introduced, acommunications strategy would need to be devisedto ensure that all those people who wished to opt outentirely, or to opt out of the donation of particularorgans or tissues, knew how to do so. in addition,communications would be needed to outlinearrangements for special groups such as children,those lacking capacity and visitors to the uK.consideration would need to be given to theinformation needs of ethnic minorities, those withenglish as a second language, and hard-to-reachgroups, such as the homeless. The media campaignwould need to be extensive both in its use of differentforms of media and in its duration (over at least twoyears, prior to and after enactment of legislation). sucha campaign would require considerable resource (atleast £45 million initially, with further remindercampaigns every few years and as new transplantsbecome possible). The effectiveness of this campaignwould need to be evaluated on a regular basis toidentify any deciencies. a lack of information woulddisadvantage those who wished to opt out but did notknow how to do so. This might conceivably lead tolegal challenge in the future.14.2of concern is the fact that communications wouldnecessarilyinvolve highlighting the negative aspects ofdonation rather than the positive. The consequencemight be an unintended increase in the opt out ratebeyond that anticipated. The Taskforce was concernedthat if an opt out system were run with a strong societalmessage in favour of donation, people might feelreluctant to record an opt out, fearing that it wouldmake them subject to unequal healthcare if theybecame ill. a consequence of a poorly executed orresourced campaign might be inclusion of those whodid not wish to donate among those presumed tohave consented. Obratite paznju na to kako se jedna drzava brine za to da adekvatno informise sve gradjane u vezi ove ideje opt-outa. Da li se nesto slicno radi u Srbiji? (The media campaign would need to be extensive both in its use of different forms of media and in its duration (over at least two years, prior to and after enactment of legislation). such a campaign would require considerable resource (at least £45 million initially, with further reminder campaigns every few years and as new transplants become possible). The effectiveness of this campaign would need to be evaluated on a regular basis to identify any deficiencies. a lack of information would disadvantage those who wished to opt out but did not know how to do so. This might conceivably lead to legal challenge in the future.)EDIT Znaci, oni hoce da opt-out treba da budu tretirani pristojno, a ne k'o 1 stoka. Edited May 7, 2013 by Indy
nera Posted May 7, 2013 Posted May 7, 2013 EDIT Znaci, oni hoce da opt-out treba da budu tretirani pristojno, a ne k'o 1 stoka.Mislim da se ovde razilazimo sa normalnim zemljama
Joe D Posted May 7, 2013 Posted May 7, 2013 pa dobro, ovo za sad postoji kao ideja i jos uvek nismo upoznati sa time kako bi trebalo da funkcionise. sasvim sigurno da bi kod nas broj donora znacajno porastao u odnosu na postojeci sistem, i to je ono sto je meni bitno. a o informisanju i tretmanu treba dalje raspravljati.u svakom slucaju,ovde kao i u australijskom sistemu koji pominjes postoji distinkcija izmedju onih koji hoce i onih koji nece da pokone organe, pa ne vidim da je razlika toiko bitna u stvarima koje se pominju u clanku koji si postavio. dilema je u tome koji ce sistem obezbediti bolju informisanost ljudi pre nego sto se donese odluka.
garcia Posted May 7, 2013 Posted May 7, 2013 (edited) Tri žene umrle nakon što su im presađeni organi istog donatora poreklom iz SrbijeTri žene u Australiji umrle su u roku od mesec dana nakon što su im transplantirani organi istog donatora. Kako se saznaje na sudu, reč je o čoveku preminulom od retkog virusa koji prenose miševi. Karen Vilkinson (44), Karmelina Siriani (63) i Gurpal Sandu (64) dobile su organe od pedesetsedmogodišnjeg Jova Vranješevića i umrle su jedna za drugom u roku od jednog meseca, u razmacima od šest dana. http://www.blic.rs/V...eklom-iz-Srbijeps:izgleda ovi iz blica videli indijev post. Edited May 7, 2013 by garcia
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now