Letter: Presumed consent in organ donations is not consent — it is presumption, and a distortion of the concept of consent

For months Sir Jeffrey Donaldson has used the argument that the principle of consent underpinning self determination enshrined in the Good Friday Agreement has been undermined by the protocol, yet he has signed a letter seeking the secretary of state to implement a law that destroys the definition of consent!

The Organ donation law is based on presumed consent.

Presumed consent is not consent —it is presumption!

Presumed consent is not donation —it is acquisition by presumption!

Presumed consent is both a distortion and redefinition of consent!

Presumed consent comes unjustifiably close to state theft of a person's organs, aggravated by the use of emotional manipulation via the mis-applied soundbite that it will save lives —the inference being that if a person decides to opt out, he or she is refusing to save life.

There is a thin line between emotional manipulation and emotional blackmail. It doesn't take much imagination to think how that line may be crossed in the future! Legislators should employ neither in the making of laws!

Besides the moral and ethical implications of the state presuming ownership of a person's organs, it is inconsistent to refer to the absence of consent for the protocol, while endorsing a similar absence of consent in the matter of organ acquisition.

Organ donation should require actual consent by an individual. It is the only way to avoid the uncertainty of presumption, the inconsistency of definition, and the charge of emotional manipulation.

Noel Hughes, Kells, Co Antrim