catgate Posted August 31, 2006 Report Share Posted August 31, 2006 I am just glad my name is not Hammond. What next do you suppose?http://today.reuters.co.uk/news/articlenew...TAIN-ORGANS.xml Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deuces wild Posted August 31, 2006 Report Share Posted August 31, 2006 If the deceased wanted to donate his/her organs it is not up to the surviving family members to interfere with that wish. The deceased wishes should be honored. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cozofdeath Posted August 31, 2006 Report Share Posted August 31, 2006 How does having the families decide fix this problem? Why not just fine/jail the criminals? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlanHo Posted September 1, 2006 Report Share Posted September 1, 2006 Next will be a ban on donating pianos and trumpets. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andsome Posted September 1, 2006 Report Share Posted September 1, 2006 If the deceased wanted to donate his/her organs it is not up to the surviving family members to interfere with that wish. The deceased wishes should be honored.AGREED 100% Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-pops- Posted September 1, 2006 Report Share Posted September 1, 2006 the surviving family members (to) interfereIt is not only in issues like that. After a death there seems to be a collective greed amongst relatives who possibly have not seen or contacted the deceased for many years but still consider they have a right to the spoils of the relict's estate such that they contest wills, assume they have automatic rights to own artefacts with a total disregard to anyone who has a legitimate ownership.I remember when my mother died that for several weeks afterwards there were visits of numerous relatives (you know, the ones only ever seen at weddings and funerals but seem to dematerialise at other times) who were asking what what going to happen to this, that and the other in the house completely disregarding the fact that my father still lived there. She died intestate so, under the law, her estate passed to her surviving spouse. Well, you wouldn't think that from the reactions of these "relatives". They contested the probate in court, even going so far as staking a claim on the house in which my father still lived.There are many situations where it's best not to have relatives - demonstrated in this thread. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andsome Posted September 1, 2006 Report Share Posted September 1, 2006 When my Brother in Law was still quite young his marriage broke up. He gave up his home to his wife and moved out so that his two daughters could have a roof over their heads. He was denied access to the two daughters, and their minds were poisoned against him. He could not afford expensive legal costs as he had to provide a home for himself as well. He provided fully for the girls all during their upbringing. He tried from time to time to contact them, with little response. The one did agree to an occasional meeting. One daughter did eventually marry. Before the wedding, he contacted her and said that he appreciated the fact that her Step father would give her away, but said that he would like to sit by himself at the back of the church and see the ceremony. He was told that he would not be welcome, but that he could if he wanted, stand outside the church gate and see her arrive and look over the wall at the photographing ceremony etc. He died at the age of 60 a couple of years ago. As he had had so little contact with the daughters during their upbringing, and in view of their attitude, he had left his entire estate to be shared equally between his surviving brothers and sisters. One of the daughters had the nerve to write to the brother who was acting as executor, and state that she considered that her and her sister were entitled to at least a share from the estate. Bear in mind that while he was alive, she had personally not allowed him to see her own two little children, so he NEVER even had the chance to be a granddad. Needless to say the letter from her remained unanswered. They both had the cheek to turn up at his funeral, but were ostracised by the family, including 'Er indoors and me. A sad tale, confirming pops story of greedy relatives. Sorry to have gone off topic. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thos Posted September 1, 2006 Report Share Posted September 1, 2006 When my Brother in Law was still quite young his marriage broke up. He gave up his home to his wife and moved out so that his two daughters could have a roof over their heads. He was denied access to the two daughters, and their minds were poisoned against him. He could not afford expensive legal costs as he had to provide a home for himself as well. He provided fully for the girls all during their upbringing. He tried from time to time to contact them, with little response. The one did agree to an occasional meeting. One daughter did eventually marry. Before the wedding, he contacted her and said that he appreciated the fact that her Step father would give her away, but said that he would like to sit by himself at the back of the church and see the ceremony. He was told that he would not be welcome, but that he could if he wanted, stand outside the church gate and see her arrive and look over the wall at the photographing ceremony etc. He died at the age of 60 a couple of years ago. As he had had so little contact with the daughters during their upbringing, and in view of their attitude, he had left his entire estate to be shared equally between his surviving brothers and sisters. One of the daughters had the nerve to write to the brother who was acting as executor, and state that she considered that her and her sister were entitled to at least a share from the estate. Bear in mind that while he was alive, she had personally not allowed him to see her own two little children, so he NEVER even had the chance to be a granddad. Needless to say the letter from her remained unanswered. They both had the cheek to turn up at his funeral, but were ostracised by the family, including 'Er indoors and me. A sad tale, confirming pops story of greedy relatives. Sorry to have gone off topic.What a really sad story, andsome. I feel for the poor man suffering so much emotional stress in his lifetime.Back to topic, though, I totally agree with deuces wild on this.Thos. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sir T Fireball Posted September 2, 2006 Report Share Posted September 2, 2006 I also agree and would go as far as to suggest harvesting should be compulsory. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andsome Posted September 2, 2006 Report Share Posted September 2, 2006 I also agree and would go as far as to suggest harvesting should be compulsory.If you need a new organ, a bale of hay will be of little use. :D :D Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
catgate Posted September 2, 2006 Author Report Share Posted September 2, 2006 If you need a new organ, a bale of hay will be of little use. :D :DI've never known of anybody who could get a tune out of a bale of hay. It may have something to do with it being too big to go under the chin or into the mouth. Most of them do have strings, though. Maybe they could be plucked or scraped. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andsome Posted September 2, 2006 Report Share Posted September 2, 2006 You have to hit it with a drum stick. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
catgate Posted September 2, 2006 Author Report Share Posted September 2, 2006 You have to hit it with a drum stick.We do not eat a lot of poultry. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deuces wild Posted September 2, 2006 Report Share Posted September 2, 2006 I also agree and would go as far as to suggest harvesting should be compulsory.I don't know if it could ever become compulsory for legal reasons.However, I cannot see why anyone would not want to donate their organs once they pass away.BTW: Nice seeing you here again Sir Fireballs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sir T Fireball Posted September 3, 2006 Report Share Posted September 3, 2006 Hi Jimbo :P Ok, I'll ammend my views. It should be assumed that everyone is willing to donate unless they make the effort to opt out. After a short time, many people will simply not bother to go to the post office and fill in the required 4 page forms (because we are lazy buggers :D ) and our hospitals fridges will soon be chocka-block with tripe and the such :) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
catgate Posted September 3, 2006 Author Report Share Posted September 3, 2006 and our hospitals will soon be chocka-block with tripeThey currently are...directives and strategies. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andsome Posted September 3, 2006 Report Share Posted September 3, 2006 and our hospitals will soon be chocka-block with tripeThey currently are...directives and strategies.And targets, and managers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.