This is the sort of nonsense that goes down when you cede control of your healthcare decisions to the government as is the case with New York state's government-managed healthcare system.
Organ donation has become a vital way to save lives around the world, but a vast shortage of donors continues to mean people are losing their lives while on waiting lists.
But there is a unique proposal that could change all that.
New York State Assemblyman Richard Brodsky nearly lost his daughter, Willie, at 4 years old when she needed a kidney transplant, and again 10 years later when her second kidney failed.
"We have 10,000 New Yorkers on the list today waiting for organs. We import half the organs we transplant. It is an unacceptable failed system," Brodsky said.
To fix that, Brodsky introduced a new bill in Albany that would enroll all New Yorkers as an organ donor, unless they actually opt out of organ donation. It would be the first law of its kind in the United States.
"Overseas, 24 nations have it. Israel has it. Others have it. And it works without a lot of controversy," Brodsky said.
Currently one of the biggest obstacles to being a donor is while 9 out of 10 are favorable to it only 1 out of 10 is signed up to be a donor.
Isn't it benevolent that New York's overseers have seen fit to allow its citizens to opt out?
The tone of the article seemed puzzled that 90% of New Yorkers were for (voluntary) organ donation but only 10% participated the program. Seems to be perfectly in keeping with the volunteerism nature of America, to us... If it works for you, brother, go for it.
We understand that compulsory organ donation might work great elsewhere but that's not really the point. The point is, where do you draw the line? What other aspect of your literal body is the government going to invite itself to?
Very quickly and without much notice, that slippery slope of resigned personal choices becomes a Vancouver Olympics bobsled run. Enjoy the ride.