I'm sorry, what? Are you saying aren't an organ donor because your family would not get paid for it? How would you value the organs? Do you believe having the ability to pay for an organ makes one more morally deserving to live?

All the other entities are doing work - of course they need to be paid. You are dead, you're doing nothing. Why would you be paid?

Ah, for the same reason that you pay someone's estate for their land rather than just take it for the good of everyone. We do not consider one's remains the property of one's estate, strictly. We only recognize one's right to interment or alternative disposal to be executed by one's kin etc. I believe this is wrong. I have spent quite a few decades growing me and ownership of this body must rest more strongly with my estate than any other possession I have.

In keeping with that, I intend to retain the right to disposal of this possession as I see fit.

EDIT-response:

user munk-a: I think I am content to have my body treated just as other property that I have owned in my life. If inheritance laws prohibit inheriting property but permit putting it in a never-dying trust, then I will prefer that my body be treated as such. If all property is transferred to the state upon death, then so be it for my body. I am not anti-social. I merely have this one (apparently peculiar) view on ownership of one's body.

Actually, personally, I despise all inheritance related laws - I understand the historical origin of them and they did make quite a bit of sense but in this modern world I think the only thing that inheritance does is degrade any attempts we might make at moving more toward a meritocracy.

Then again I was strongly influenced by Longhouse traditions growing up and also feel rather neutral on private property ownership in general.

It's very interesting - sort of like college athletics. Everyone makes good to insane money - except the people taking the big health risks and/or putting in the hours.

A lot of moral outrage at the idea here though usually from folks getting rich off the industry.

There have been proposals to do something like $10 - $20K for a liver. The way to get around the outrage mob is usually to point out the health risks, impacts on life a quality of life etc.

In short, if you were in a car crash and lost a liver, you'd be getting a big pay day for those things.

Normal split is 1/3 or so to hospital, and 2/3 kept by donor network admins I think for the fees they charge for Organ acquisition. Donor Network West in CA does $90M a year or so I think? I'm not sure what annual fees are nationally, I'd expect in the 100's of millions range (this does not include all the costs to actual do the transplant).

That said, any discussion on this type of topic tends to attract of one liner type attacks from the outrage folks - so not usually worth having.

But folks are thinking about how to dramatically increase donor rates because it is so impactful. Other options have been to pay $100 - 500/year you list as a donor etc which would save incredible numbers of lives at what is relatively low cost. I heard one funny idea which was to do this for folks who get M class licenses (motorcycles). The idea was to both scare them about the risks of riding a motorcycles and of course they really are more likely to be a donor per mile riden (I'm a rider, and the stats are actually terrible in contrast to other things people worry about)

> The way to get around the outrage mob is usually to point out the health risks, impacts on life a quality of life etc.

I'm confused- we're talking about post-mortem organ donation... What quality of life are you referring to? Quality of life for living donors? How does that apply in a discussion where the donors have passed away?

Post mortem the arguments are even easier then.

More organ donors would be a good thing, give folks $100 one time gift card for signing up - you'd have a ton of folks do that and the cost is tiny.

Maybe $2,500 to help with funeral expenses if you scoop all their organs out and sell them for $2.6M (that's probably average billed charges for a heart / kidney transplant).

Reality - the folks with the money (transplant surgeons, athletic directors in colleges) and their supporters here will NEVER share with the folks running around on courts and fields (college athletes) or providing the organs or whatever. You actually see this pattern over and over, usually with a fair bit of suffering on the side (folks not able to get transplants, injured college athletes etc).

That's why it's called donation.

What the

Is it irrelevant or something? It felt relevant on this article and considering this is a startup site.

I don't mean to diminish the benefit of watching another young man being able to run and live with the heart of one's child in him but merely to ensure that some part of the value chain comes to rest where the person providing a crucial piece intended.

EDIT-Response since I'm now rate-limited.

User psychometry: I am not complaining about the downvotes, to be clear. I don't mind being voted down by people who disagree with me since that is how this platform is intended to be used. I would prefer not to because it makes what I say hard to see but if the community believes it doesn't fit, then it doesn't fit. This comment was intended to be a request for clarification from this guy, but if no one wants to share that's also okay. I won't be very upset. It is a sunny day in San Francisco with no traffic. I will go for a ride and if I am to die on my motorcycle, my organs will rot. That is unfortunate, but perhaps if that happens a year from now, they will instead be of use, and my family will be wealthier by some small measure.

You're getting downvoted into oblivion because you wrote an astonishingly selfish and moronic screed because of some kind of weird financial code you apparently live by. Truly bizarre.

I'd love to see the social media or technology you willingly use and donate information to that allows others to get rich off your non-compensated usage.

If you were in a life-or-death situation, would you accept an organ without paying the donor’s family an appropiate fee?

I think your motivations are different from most who are open to having their organs used to save others' lives.

Whoa. To each their own, I guess. Maybe next time just say it conflicts with your beliefs?

That sounds like an incredibly selfish decision; for-profit healthcare is the reality in the United States (where I'm guessing you're from), so why deny others that benefit just because of the system?

Good lord. A capitalist to the end. Do your next of kin even want the proceeds from the sale of your remains?

I intend to set it up so that, should they refuse the proceeds, the money is spent in a manner I feel is optimal. For instance, if I were to be able to sell my heart for $100k to a rich industrialist's son, then that's 101 lives saved (1 from the heart, 100 from GiveWell's current best).

I believe that I will spend the money better than the rich industrialist, so it makes sense for me to back me over him.

EDIT-response:

User dougmwne: Thank you. I do actually have life insurance. That is only sensible considering I ride a motorcycle. I do not disagree that professionals performing a professional duty should be permitted the right to charge for their services.

I think, if transplant surgery were not a protected employment category I would be content to give my organs for free to those not operating in the for-profit system and charge (as raw materials) those who operate in the for-profit system. It's no different from your surgeon charging you for your hip implant. Someone gets paid for manufacturing that hip implant. I merely want to get paid for manufacturing this heart.

Or you could buy life insurance like the rest of us! Upvotes for the lateral thinking though and since your downvoters are treating it like the disagree button. I don't think you deserved to have the post deleted. My fundamental disagreement is that I think the staff and professionals that carry out the donation process and medical procedures are completely worthy of their pay and that the recipients pay for the medical procedure, not the materials. If they paid market rate for the organs, these lifesaving procedures would be even more out of reach.

I was hoping the OP comment would be flagged dead rather quickly, but this was essentially my response too. I emigrated from the US to Canada purely because of this pervasive mentality that "I can't suffer you to benefit unless I'm getting something out of the deal". It isn't held by everyone in America or even the majority as far as I've seen - but what's weird is that in the US that view is socially acceptable and that's pretty horrifying to me.

Not everything in life is a transaction where you're either the winner or the loser. Trying to measure things in that manner will lead you to lose out on a lot of joy.

The issue is that you are supporting a bunch of for profit businesses making an absolute killing, while not even throwing table scraps to the key players, the donors.

If someone is going to harvest my Organs and get paid $800K+ per year (California Transplant Surgeon's probably average $750K and some are making $2-3M/year) it's really hard to swallow your and their morally superior tone.

Hey - I absolutely applaud you if you're going to help tear down the private portions of the organ trade business. It should be a publicly managed service like healthcare in general - but for now this is what we're stuck with and a lot of innocent lives are on the line.

I think that, in the long run, it's pretty immoral to throw table scraps at the donors since it'll create some very perverse market incentives to make certain your organ isn't "being wasted" on some penniless orphan somewhere.

I decided to leave insane American wages behind for a society that cares more about egalitarianism - that isn't solving the problem but it's the best contribution I can personally make.

I don't think that's an American sentiment. I've heard people cite religious reasons or conspiratorial suspicions about being left to die in the hospital after suffering a serious injury, but nothing even remotely echoing what OP posted.

I'd prefer not to name specific countries, but there are certain overseas markets with thriving black market organ trades. That is what first came to mind when OP expressed the desire that his family be compensated for his organs. Considering some of these cultures have arguably similar existing customs (e.g. intentionally killing a pedestrian that you have accidentally injured but offering the family a large sum of money in exchange for silence) what the OP stated may not be considered unreasonable to someone looking at the world through that lens.

Certainly I would have found this position harder to justify when I was covered by the NHS. It is likely that I would remain an organ donor there since everyone is pulling together and I wouldn't want to be the one getting in the way.

EDIT: Oh and some of you have asked me questions. This platform has now blocked me from responding for some duration, presumably to stop flamebait or troll threads (neither of which is what I was up to). I am happy to continue this conversation over email (in profile) or alternatively I can have a vaccinated representative meet you in person in San Francisco to discuss over coffee.

Wow, you do seem to have ruffled many feathers. One of your posts is dead and flagged. Anyway I fully agree - you can do what you want with your body, others should have no say.

p.s - see if my profile, or the link on my profile catches your attention.

> Over the next year, I hope to write down a fee schedule and a quick-to-sign contract that will hopefully bring down the friction to get my organs down to 15 min after my death for someone who can pay appropriately.

Folks, this a joke. Take it easy.