Search

Deemed consent legislation for deceased organ donation was introduced in England in 2020, and is considered a vital part of the new UK NHS Blood and Transplant's 10-year strategy to increase consent for organ donation. Despite the legislation containing safeguards to protect the public, the introduction of deemed consent creates ethical, psychological and social un/certainties for healthcare professionals in their practice. In this paper, we offer insights into healthcare professionals' perspectives on deemed consent, drawn from interview data with 24 healthcare professionals in an NHS Trust in England, prior to the introduction of the legislation. Whilst participants supported deemed consent in principle, they were concerned that it would present a threat to the nature of donation as a 'gift'; the notion of informed consent (or non-consent); and the autonomy of donors, their relatives, and their own roles as health professionals, posing dilemmas for practice. We argue that healthcare professionals present themselves as guardians of potential (non)donors and thus as having ethics and integrity in their own practice. We draw conclusions around the values and principles that matter to healthcare professionals when contemplating consent in deceased donation which will be useful for organ donation committees and ethics forums. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: In the UK, over 7,000 people are on the waiting list for an organ transplant and there are inequalities in need, access and waiting time for organs, with notable differences between minority ethnic groups. In May 2020, England changed the law and introduced a 'soft' opt-out system of consent to organ donation with a view to increase consent rates. We aimed to learn more about the impact of the law change on attitudes and views likely to be relevant to consent to deceased organ donation between different population subgroups. Methods: Mixed-methods design involving latent class analysis of data from twelve repeated cross-sectional surveys undertaken from 2015 to 2021 (n = 19,011); analysis of the law change survey dataset collected quarterly from 2018 to 2022 (n = 45,439); and interviews with purposively selected members of the public (n = 30) with a focus on minority perspectives. Results: Support for the principle of deceased organ donation remained high and stable in the general population (80%) but was 20% lower among ethnic minorities. From 2018 to 2022, an average of 58% of the general population was aware of the law change; this was lower among minority ethnic groups (31%). We identified four population subgroups (supportive donors (24% of the population); unengaged donors (22%); uncommitted donors (46%); and unsupportive donors (9%)). Interview themes included the challenges of discussing organ donation decisions, balancing autonomy with respecting family relationships, targeted misinformation, frustrations at the lack of consensus between community leaders, limited understanding of what happens during the end-of-life care leading to organ donation, and how this aligns with cultural values and preferences. Conclusion: Implementation of the law change has not been associated to date with any change in public attitudes and preferences likely to influence consent overall or in minority ethnic groups in England. Uncommitted donors may benefit from encouragement to express their organ donation decision, and unengaged donors from attempts to address mis/information, confusion, and uncertainty. Interventions to raise the consent rate need to take account of the significant role of the family as well as wider community influences on attitudes, preferences and decision-making, particularly among certain minority (ethnic) groups. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract Background In the UK, over 7,000 people are on the waiting list for an organ transplant and there are inequalities in need, access and waiting time for organs, with notable differences between minority ethnic groups. In May 2020, England changed the law and introduced a ‘soft’ opt-out system of consent to organ donation with a view to increase consent rates. We aimed to learn more about the impact of the law change on attitudes and views likely to be relevant to consent to deceased organ donation between different population subgroups. Methods Mixed-methods design involving latent class analysis of data from twelve repeated cross-sectional surveys undertaken from 2015 to 2021 (n = 19,011); analysis of the law change survey dataset collected quarterly from 2018 to 2022 (n = 45,439); and interviews with purposively selected members of the public (n = 30) with a focus on minority perspectives. Results Support for the principle of deceased organ donation remained high and stable in the general population (80%) but was 20% lower among ethnic minorities. From 2018 to 2022, an average of 58% of the general population was aware of the law change; this was lower among minority ethnic groups (31%). We identified four population subgroups (supportive donors (24% of the population); unengaged donors (22%); uncommitted donors (46%); and unsupportive donors (9%)). Interview themes included the challenges of discussing organ donation decisions, balancing autonomy with respecting family relationships, targeted misinformation, frustrations at the lack of consensus between community leaders, limited understanding of what happens during the end-of-life care leading to organ donation, and how this aligns with cultural values and preferences. Conclusion Implementation of the law change has not been associated to date with any change in public attitudes and preferences likely to influence consent overall or in minority ethnic groups in England. Uncommitted donors may benefit from encouragement to express their organ donation decision, and unengaged donors from attempts to address mis/information, confusion, and uncertainty. Interventions to raise the consent rate need to take account of the significant role of the family as well as wider community influences on attitudes, preferences and decision-making, particularly among certain minority (ethnic) groups.

In the three years since the law on adult deceased organ donation consent in England changed to include an opt-out system, there has been no discernible change to donation rates. The lack of a positive impact on donation rates was predicted by many of those who took part in debates before and during the passage of the Bill through Parliament. This invites the question as to why England moved to an opt-out system for organ donation despite equivocal evidence of likely benefit and opposition from expert health professional organisations. To address this question qualitative analyses of Parliamentary debates on organ donation was undertaken. This revealed a shift from a dominant position, which gave primacy to the evidence of likely effects, towards a more normative position where a deemed consent option was viewed as the 'correct thing to do' and the limited and conflicting evidence viewed in a positive light. By 2017, following Wales's move to an opt-out system, together with continued lobbying for similar changes for England by professional and patient groups, alongside sustained public popularity for organ donation, the balance of opinion had shifted towards a system where deemed consent would become the default position for most English adults [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Canadian Journal of Anaesthesia / Journal Canadien d'Anesthésie is the property of Springer Nature and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

It is often claimed that a legitimate approach to organ donation is an opt-out system, also known as 'presumed consent','deemed consent', or 'deemed authorisation', whereby individuals are presumed or deemed willing to donate at least some of their organs and tissues after death unless they have explicitly refused permission. While sharing a default in favour of donation, such systems differ in several key respects, such as the role and importance assigned to the family members of prospective donors and their preferences, and exclusions and safeguards which often specify the demographic groups, purposes, or organs and tissues that will remain outside the scope of the opt-out system. Using the recent shift to opt-out in England, Scotland, and Northern Ireland as case studies, and by reference to the key goals motivating this shift across the UK, this article asks whether and, if so, why, and how, opt-out systems for post-mortem organ donation should restrict the types of organs and tissues for which consent is deemed. In other words, ought opt-out systems for PMOD presume dissent regarding the donation of certain organs and tissues? [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

It is often claimed that a legitimate approach to organ donation is an opt-out system, also known as 'presumed consent', 'deemed consent', or 'deemed authorisation', whereby individuals are presumed or deemed willing to donate at least some of their organs and tissues after death unless they have explicitly refused permission. While sharing a default in favour of donation, such systems differ in several key respects, such as the role and importance assigned to the family members of prospective donors and their preferences, and exclusions and safeguards which often specify the demographic groups, purposes, or organs and tissues that will remain outside the scope of the optout system. Using the recent shift to opt-out in England, Scotland, and Northern Ireland as case studies, and by reference to the key goals motivating this shift across the UK, this article asks whether and, if so, why, and how, opt-out systems for post-mortem organ donation should restrict the types of organs and tissues for which consent is deemed. In other words, ought opt-out systems for PMOD presume dissent regarding the donation of certain organs and tissues? [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract Background This study was an ex-ante cost-utility analysis of deemed consent legislation for deceased organ donation in Nova Scotia, a province in Canada. The legislation became effective in January 2021. The study's objective was to assess the conditions necessary for the legislation change’s cost-effectiveness compared to expressed consent, focusing on kidney transplantation (KT). Method We performed a cost-utility analysis using a Markov model with a lifetime horizon. The study was from a Canadian payer perspective. The target population was patients with end-stage kidney disease (ESKD) in Atlantic Canada waitlisted for KT. The intervention was the deemed consent and accompanying health system transformations. Expressed consent (before the change) was the comparator. We simulated the minimum required increase in deceased donor KT per year for the cost-effectiveness of the deemed consent. We also evaluated how changes in dialysis and maintenance immunosuppressant drug costs and living donor KT per year impacted cost-effectiveness in sensitivity analyses. Results The expected lifetime cost of an ESKD patient ranged from $177,663 to $553,897. In the deemed consent environment, the expected lifetime cost per patient depended on the percentage increases in the proportion of ESKD patients on the waitlist getting a KT in a year. The incremental cost-utility ratio (ICUR) increased with deceased donor KT per year. Cost-effectiveness of deemed consent compared to expressed consent required a minimum of a 1% increase in deceased donor KT per year. A 1% increase was associated with an ICUR of $32,629 per QALY (95% CI: − $64,279, $232,488) with a 81% probability of being cost-effective if the willingness-to-pay (WTP) was $61,466. Increases in dialysis and post-KT maintenance immunosuppressant drug costs above a threshold impacted value for money. The threshold for immunosuppressant drug costs also depended on the percent increases in deceased donor KT probability and the WTP threshold. Conclusions The deemed consent legislation in NS for deceased organ donation and the accompanying health system transformations are cost-effective to the extent that they are anticipated to contribute to more deceased donor KTs than before, and even a small increase in the proportion of waitlist patients receiving a deceased donor KT than before the change represents value for money.

Copyright of Canadian Journal of Anaesthesia / Journal Canadien d'Anesthésie is the property of Springer Nature and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Background: This study was an ex-ante cost-utility analysis of deemed consent legislation for deceased organ donation in Nova Scotia, a province in Canada. The legislation became effective in January 2021. The study's objective was to assess the conditions necessary for the legislation change's cost-effectiveness compared to expressed consent, focusing on kidney transplantation (KT). Method: We performed a cost-utility analysis using a Markov model with a lifetime horizon. The study was from a Canadian payer perspective. The target population was patients with end-stage kidney disease (ESKD) in Atlantic Canada waitlisted for KT. The intervention was the deemed consent and accompanying health system transformations. Expressed consent (before the change) was the comparator. We simulated the minimum required increase in deceased donor KT per year for the cost-effectiveness of the deemed consent. We also evaluated how changes in dialysis and maintenance immunosuppressant drug costs and living donor KT per year impacted cost-effectiveness in sensitivity analyses. Results: The expected lifetime cost of an ESKD patient ranged from $177,663 to $553,897. In the deemed consent environment, the expected lifetime cost per patient depended on the percentage increases in the proportion of ESKD patients on the waitlist getting a KT in a year. The incremental cost-utility ratio (ICUR) increased with deceased donor KT per year. Cost-effectiveness of deemed consent compared to expressed consent required a minimum of a 1% increase in deceased donor KT per year. A 1% increase was associated with an ICUR of $32,629 per QALY (95% CI: − $64,279, $232,488) with a 81% probability of being cost-effective if the willingness-to-pay (WTP) was $61,466. Increases in dialysis and post-KT maintenance immunosuppressant drug costs above a threshold impacted value for money. The threshold for immunosuppressant drug costs also depended on the percent increases in deceased donor KT probability and the WTP threshold. Conclusions: The deemed consent legislation in NS for deceased organ donation and the accompanying health system transformations are cost-effective to the extent that they are anticipated to contribute to more deceased donor KTs than before, and even a small increase in the proportion of waitlist patients receiving a deceased donor KT than before the change represents value for money. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

With aims to both increase organ supply and better reflect individual donation preferences, many nations worldwide have shifted from 'opt‐in' to 'opt‐out' systems for post‐mortem organ donation (PMOD). In such countries, while a prospective donor's willingness to donate their organs/tissues for PMOD was previously ascertained—at least partially—by their having recorded positive donation preferences on an official register prior to death, this willingness is now presumed or inferred—at least partially—from their not having recorded an objection to PMOD—on an official organ donation register. Using evidence regarding the presence and prevalence of selective donation preferences, and via exploration of how appeals to donation preferences are used to both motivate and legitimate shifts to opt‐out frameworks, this paper draws attention to a set of previously unexplored problems for opt‐out organ donation arising in contexts where: (a) individuals demonstrate selective post‐mortem organ/tissue donation preferences, (b) legislation provides prospective donors with the opportunity to selectively permit/refuse the donation of certain organs/tissues in line with these preferences. While selective preferences pose few problems for opt‐in systems where a selective occasion is built into the process of signing the donor register, this is not the case for opt‐out systems. The loss of this selective occasion can cause significant problems where appeals to preferences motivate/legitimate shifts to opt‐out but evidence regarding variable preferences does not feed into determinations regarding organ/tissue exclusions. The nature of these problems depends on how the authorization aspect of 'opt‐out' systems is framed (e.g. as presumed consent, deemed consent or, given the role of familial consent in many jurisdictions as consent in name only). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In May 2020, England implemented "deemed consent" legislation, to make it easier for individuals to donate their organs and convey their decision when alive. Families are supposed to support the decision but can still override it if they disagree. We aimed to learn more about this changed role when families were approached about organ donation. A qualitative study using semi-structured interviews with families, feedback from nurses, comparisons with audit data, and public involvement. We used framework analysis with a health systems perspective and utilitarian theory to explore if the law worked. 103 participants were interviewed representing 83 potential donation cases. In 31/83 (37%) cases donation was fully supported, in 41/83 (49%) cases families supported retrieval of some organs, tissues and procedures, and in 11/83 (13%) cases families declined completely. Themes explaining why the law was not (yet) working included: Understanding and agreeing the family's role, confusion about deemed consent, not supporting the deceased expressed decisions, organ donation as too much of a harm, the different experiences of donation pathways, transition from end-of-life to organ donation discussions, experiences of 'consent', paperwork and processes. Families frequently questioned if their relative wanted to have a surgery rather than supporting the person who died to save lives. Families use the unique experience of their relative dying in intensive care to create alternate narratives whereby the outcome satisfies their own utility and not necessarily those of the potential donor. New public ongoing media campaigns crafted to be more supportive of organ donation as a benefit to transplant recipients could help families overcome the many difficulties they encounter at the bedside. The soft opt-out policy has not empowered nurses to help families at their most vulnerable to increase their support for and consent to deceased organ donation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

It is often claimed that a legitimate approach to organ donation is an opt-out system, also known as 'presumed consent', 'deemed consent', or 'deemed authorisation', whereby individuals are presumed or deemed willing to donate at least some of their organs and tissues after death unless they have explicitly refused permission. While sharing a default in favour of donation, such systems differ in several key respects, such as the role and importance assigned to the family members of prospective donors and their preferences, and exclusions and safeguards which often specify the demographic groups, purposes, or organs and tissues that will remain outside the scope of the opt-out system. Using the recent shift to opt-out in England, Scotland, and Northern Ireland as case studies, and by reference to the key goals motivating this shift across the UK, this article asks whether and, if so, why, and how, opt-out systems for post-mortem organ donation should restrict the types of organs and tissues for which consent is deemed. In other words, ought opt-out systems for PMOD presume dissent regarding the donation of certain organs and tissues? [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In May 2020, England adopted an opt-out approach for organ donation, also referred to as the deemed consent system, with the aim of alleviating the demand for organs in the UK. This system dictates that those who have not opted out will have their organs donated following their death, with the exception of those meeting certain criteria. This article applies the philosophical theory of utilitarianism to the deemed consent system for organ donation, focusing particularly on topics such as that of informed consent and family refusal. Utilitarianism is a consequentialist theory that attempts to determine whether an action is morally right or wrong based on whether or not it maximises the preferences of the greatest number of people, with each person's satisfaction being considered as equal to another's. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract In an attempt to improve organ donation rates, some countries are considering moving from “opt‐in” systems where citizens must express their willingness to be an organ donor, to “opt‐out” systems where consent is presumed unless individuals have expressed their wishes otherwise, by, for example, joining an “opt‐out” register. In Wales—a part of the United Kingdom—the devolved government recently legislated for an “opt‐out” system. For the change to be effective, a public awareness campaign was critical to the policy's success. Using quantitative and qualitative content analysis, we explored media coverage of the change to better understand the relationship between the state, policy actors, media and the public when such policy changes take place. Our findings illustrate how a state communication campaign can effectively set the media agenda within which we saw a degree of interdependency created with the state using the media to promote policy, and the media relying on the state for credible information. Yet we also found that the media is not uncritical and observed how it uses its autonomy to influence policy setting. Over the period of study, we found that a change in tone and view towards deemed consent organ donation has taken place in the media. However, while this may influence or reflect public attitudes, it is yet to be seen whether the media campaign translates into behavioural change that will result in increases in organ donations.

Following several international examples, England introduced a system of deemed consent for organ donation in May 2020. This had been planned for over a year. However, the unprecedented circumstances of the COVID-19 pandemic raise issues that make the timing of this change unfortunate. The planned public awareness campaign has thus far been overshadowed by media coverage of the pandemic, and will likely continue to be, creating a situation in which a significant portion of the population may be unaware of having become potential organ donors. Further, the immediate impact of the new policy is likely to be significantly weakened by the suspension of the majority of organ donation and transplant activity. In this article, we first outline the details of the new model introduced in England, before considering the impact of the pandemic on transplantation services. We put forward three ethical reasons why, given the unprecedented circumstances, the change should have been postponed. We argue that (1) COVID-19 dominating headlines will prevent widespread awareness of the change, thereby undermining the autonomy of those who do not wish to be donors; (2) a lack of transplant activity during the pandemic will make the impact of the change difficult to measure; and (3) trust in the new system may be damaged given controversial decisions regarding Do Not Attempt Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation orders and the allocation of scarce intensive care resources. These reasons combined make for a shaky start at best and present a risk of the new system failing to achieve its desired and essential effect of increasing the number of voluntary organ donors. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: In 2021, Nova Scotia, Canada, became the first jurisdiction in North America to adopt a deemed consent organ donation system under its revised Human Organ and Tissue Donation Act. This study sought to understand the early experiences of program staff and clinicians involved in implementing this legislation., Methods: We conducted semistructured interviews with members of the provincial organ donation program and intensive care unit and emergency department clinicians (n = 14). Two investigators coded transcripts of interviews, then categorized the coded data into themes., Results: We identified four key themes: 1) legislation has limited impact on daily practice; 2) legislation does not address existing barriers; 3) legislation aids conversations with donor families; and 4) legislation should provide more autonomy to patients and families, not less., Conclusion: Deemed consent legislation had limited impact on clinician's day-to-day practices, because of lack of infrastructure changes and infrequent donation opportunities. Nevertheless, participants felt the introduction of deemed consent in Nova Scotia eased conversations between families of potential donors and clinicians. These findings should be used to inform ongoing implementation of deemed consent and be considered by those contemplating similar legislative changes., (© 2023. Canadian Anesthesiologists' Society.)

In an attempt to improve organ donation rates, some countries are considering moving from "opt‐in" systems where citizens must express their willingness to be an organ donor, to "opt‐out" systems where consent is presumed unless individuals have expressed their wishes otherwise, by, for example, joining an "opt‐out" register. In Wales—a part of the United Kingdom—the devolved government recently legislated for an "opt‐out" system. For the change to be effective, a public awareness campaign was critical to the policy's success. Using quantitative and qualitative content analysis, we explored media coverage of the change to better understand the relationship between the state, policy actors, media and the public when such policy changes take place. Our findings illustrate how a state communication campaign can effectively set the media agenda within which we saw a degree of interdependency created with the state using the media to promote policy, and the media relying on the state for credible information. Yet we also found that the media is not uncritical and observed how it uses its autonomy to influence policy setting. Over the period of study, we found that a change in tone and view towards deemed consent organ donation has taken place in the media. However, while this may influence or reflect public attitudes, it is yet to be seen whether the media campaign translates into behavioural change that will result in increases in organ donations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: In April 2019, the Human Organ and Tissue Donation Act (HOTDA) in Nova Scotia was modified to incorporate a deemed consent model. In this study, we sought to understand intensive care unit (ICU) and emergency department (ED) nurses' knowledge of and confidence around organ donation and transplantation, experiences with organ donors and recipients, attitudes toward organ donation and deemed consent, and perceived opportunities and barriers to a deemed consent approach in view of the legislative change., Methods: We sent an electronic, self-administered survey to all ICU and ED nurses in Nova Scotia. The survey queried respondents on their knowledge of, experience with, and attitudes around organ donation and HOTDA, and opportunities and barriers to the implementation of HOTDA in clinical practice. Survey results were analyzed using descriptive statistics., Results: One-hundred and ninety-four nurses responded to the survey. Nearly all (98%) supported organ donation, with 86% having signed an organ donor card to donate organs and/or tissues after death. A considerable majority (89%) also supported the new legislation. Nevertheless, a minority of respondents (13%) believed that deemed consent legislation would be considered a violation of the general principles of freedom and autonomy. The three most identified topics for ongoing training were coordination of the donation process (70%), clinical management of donors (70%), and family issues in decision-making (70%)., Conclusion: Intensive care unit and ED nurses had positive attitudes toward organ donation, including deemed consent model. The findings should inform educational initiatives in Nova Scotia and beyond to optimize organ donation processes and outcomes., (© 2022. Canadian Anesthesiologists' Society.)

Background: There is little data modeling the impact of deemed consent legislation (eligible individuals who do not register their decision to decline to be a donor are presumed to consent after death) on outcomes for individuals with kidney failure., Objective: To estimate the change in life-years (LYs) and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) resulting from different changes in the rate of deceased donor kidney transplantation associated with deemed consent legislation and health system transformation., Design: Dynamic Decision Analytic Model., Setting: This modeling study included kidney failure patients in Atlantic Canada (all of whom receive their kidney transplants in Halifax, Nova Scotia). The adoption of deemed consent legislation was the intervention, and opt-in (the status quo) was the reference comparator., Patients: Prevalent kidney failure patients at the end of 2019 in all of Atlantic Canada (N = 3615) served as the starting population., Methods: We compared expected outcomes between the intervention and comparator. Changes in QALYs and total LYs were modeled under different changes to the proportion of patients receiving a deceased donor kidney transplant (from -10% to 20%) resulting from deemed consent relative to the status quo. Changes in QALYs and LYs were reported for 3 different time horizons (5, 10, and 30 years). Uncertainty around QALYs and total LYs was reported using 95% confidence intervals (CIs) constructed from a probabilistic sensitivity analysis using 1000 Monte Carlo Simulations., Results: The increase in QALYs ranged from 7 QALYs (95% CI: 5-10) with a 5% increase using a 5-year time frame to 882 QALYs (95% CI: 619-1144) with a 20% increase over a 30-year time frame. Parallel changes in total LYs were also observed. In contrast, decreases in deceased donor kidney transplantation resulted in a loss of QALYs (for example, -463 QALYs; 95% CI: -633 to -306 for a 10% decrease over a 30-year time frame). Using the most optimistic scenario (a 20% increase), there was an 18% increase in the cumulative number of deceased donor kidney transplant recipients over a 30-year observation period., Limitations: The results are subject to uncertainty depending on changes to the dialysis or transplant population that were not modeled and that may not be fully captured with probabilistic sensitivity analysis., Conclusions: Deemed consent legislation will lead to variable changes in QALYs and total LYs for the kidney failure population, depending on the degree to which deceased donor transplantation rates change and the time horizon of observation. This modeling study may serve as a baseline to monitor the future impact of deemed consent legislation., Competing Interests: The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article., (© The Author(s) 2022.)

Background and Objectives: In 2019, two Canadian provinces became the first jurisdictions in North America to pass deemed consent legislation to increase deceased organ donation and transplantation rates. We sought to explore the perspectives of the deemed consent legislation for organ donation in Canada from the viewpoint of individuals commenting on press articles., Design, Setting, Participants, & Measurements: In this qualitative descriptive study, we extracted public comments regarding deemed consent from online articles published by four major Canadian news outlets between January 2019 and July 2020. A total of 4357 comments were extracted from 35 eligible news articles. Comments were independently analyzed by two research team members using a conventional content analysis approach., Results: Commenters' perceptions of the deemed consent legislation for organ donation in Canada predominantly fit within three organizational groups: perceived positive implications of the bills, perceived negative implications of the bills, and key considerations. Three themes emerged within each group that summarized perspectives of the proposed legislation. Themes regarding the perceived positive implications of the bills included majority rules, societal effect, and prioritizing donation. Themes regarding the perceived negative implications of the bills were a right to choose, the potential for abuse and errors, and a possible slippery slope. Improving government transparency and communication, clarifying questions and addressing concerns, and providing evidence for the bills were identified as key considerations., Conclusions: If deemed consent legislation is meant to increase organ donation and transplantation, addressing public concerns will be important to ensure successful implementation., (Copyright © 2022 by the American Society of Nephrology.)

Background: The Canadian province of Nova Scotia recently became the first jurisdiction in North America to implement deemed consent organ donation legislation. Changing the consent models constituted one aspect of a larger provincial program to increase organ and tissue donation and transplantation rates. Deemed consent legislation can be controversial among the public, and public participation is integral to the successful implementation of the program., Objective: Social media constitutes key spaces where people express opinions and discuss topics, and social media discourse can influence public perceptions. This project aimed to examine how the public in Nova Scotia responded to legislative changes in Facebook groups., Methods: Using Facebook's search engine, we searched for posts in public Facebook groups using the terms "deemed consent," "presumed consent," "opt out," or "organ donation" and "Nova Scotia," appearing from January 1, 2020, to May 1, 2021. The finalized data set included 2337 comments on 26 relevant posts in 12 different public Nova Scotia-based Facebook groups. We conducted thematic and content analyses of the comments to determine how the public responded to the legislative changes and how the participants interacted with one another in the discussions., Results: Our thematic analysis revealed principal themes that supported and critiqued the legislation, raised specific issues, and reflected on the topic from a neutral perspective. Subthemes showed individuals presenting perspectives through a variety of themes, including compassion, anger, frustration, mistrust, and a range of argumentative tactics. The comments included personal narratives, beliefs about the government, altruism, autonomy, misinformation, and reflections on religion and death. Content analysis revealed that Facebook users reacted to popular comments with "likes" more than other reactions. Comments with the most reactions included both negative and positive perspectives about the legislation. Personal donation and transplantation success stories, as well as attempts to correct misinformation, were some of the most "liked" positive comments., Conclusions: The findings provide key insights into perspectives of individuals from Nova Scotia on deemed consent legislation, as well as organ donation and transplantation broadly. The insights derived from this analysis can contribute to public understanding, policy creation, and public outreach efforts that might occur in other jurisdictions considering the enactment of similar legislation., Competing Interests: Conflicts of Interest: None declared., (©Alessandro R Marcon, Darren N Wagner, Carly Giles, Cynthia Isenor. Originally published in JMIR Infodemiology (https://infodemiology.jmir.org), 14.09.2022.)

Three documents have been produced in an attempt to increase the number of organs available for transplant: a National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) clinical guideline, a British Medical Association (BMA) report and a Welsh Government white paper. All three are ethically flawed: NICE and the BMA recommend that whenever there is intention to withdraw life-sustaining treatment and death is expected, patients should instead be stabilised to assess for donation. This is contrary to patients' best interests, the principles of mental capacity legislation and current criteria for accessing intensive care units. Regarding consent, the BMA and Welsh Government recommend an 'opt-out' policy, but consent in law requires information and cannot be 'presumed' or 'deemed' on the basis of failure to express or register 'opting out'. The language of all three proposals is manipulative, and patient trust may be undermined because the doctor's attention must move from the interests of the patient to those of the unknown organ recipients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Organ donation from deceased donors should occur whenever appropriate: that is, when there is evidence, belief or understanding that donation was the stated wish of the potential donor or would be in accordance with their wishes, is lawful and in line with current guidelines and will not add further distress to the family. This is the underlying assumption of the British Medical Association (BMA) report, National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) Guideline and Welsh Government Assembly Report. For potential donors after circulatory death, it might be necessary to support the potential donor until the wishes of the person and their family are ascertained. Provided that such interventions are reasonable, explained and do not cause distress to the patient and their family, such measures are surely suitable and will also enable donation to occur when appropriate. Publication and adherence to guidelines that have clinical, legal and ethical validity will reassure the public. Organ donation not only improves the length and quality of life of recipients, but also saves resources for the NHS and provides benefit to the donor family. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

During 2020 new legislation in England and Scotland will come into force, which adopts a Welsh reform implemented in 2015, changing the law on deceased organ donation from an "opt-in" regime, based on the explicit consent of the deceased donor during their lifetime or that of their family, to a model of soft, "opt-out," whereby the deceased's consent to donate will be "deemed" unless they have registered or made known an objection during their lifetime. This column examines the ethical case for both regimes and analyses the law reform and its implications. A key issue is whether the controversial practice in soft opt-in systems of the family override, even where the deceased had opted in, will continue under the new regime. The sole aim of the law reform is to increase the supply of organs from deceased donors for transplantation to meet ever-increasing demand. Notwithstanding that taskforces in Australia and New Zealand have recently rejected introducing opt-out systems and New Zealand has not yet even introduced a dedicated organ donation register, evidence of increased donation rates following the UK reform may revive an issue which is currently off the reform agenda in this part of the world., Competing Interests: None.