John registered as a donor when he was 18 and continued to carry his donor registration card with him in his wallet; until at the age of 32, John suffered a brain hemorrhage, rendering him comatose on a ventilator with no hope of neurological recovery. His parents wish to withdrawal life support, allowing him to pass away naturally. They do not wish to proceed with the organ donation nor have they specified a reason for this. John is single rendering his parents are legally his next-of-kin. So, is it ethical to allow John’s parents to veto his organ donation?

John, his parents and the subsequent recipients of the potential organ donation all have viable incentives in the outcome of this case and each can be addressed when appealing to three …show more content…
In the UK, 10% of potential donor’s families veto the organ donation despite their relatives’ final wishes (Hope, 2012). The decision to veto a donation has the potential to jeopardises the supposed freedom an individual has over their body after death and particularly raises several issues, which were emphasized in the class discussion that are important to address in order to conclude on an ethical action. Firstly, that John’s decision to register as a donor at such a young age may have impaired his judgment. During this conversation a story emerge, where a doctor had tattooed ‘Do Not Resuscitate’ on his chest in his first year of medicine for fear of not neurologically recovering—only to admit after making a full recovery that he had made a stupid decision. However, John’s choice to register as a donor is distinguishable for two reasons; firstly that John still carries the donor registration card in his wallet—indicating that he is still willing to donate—and secondly, removing oneself from the organ donation registry is significantly easier than removing a tattoo. Thus, John’s age could not have impacted his judgment, and subsequent actions regarding his decision to donate his organs. Secondly, that organ registration in Australia is not a legally binding agreement and thus cannot be comparable to succession law, which relatives have a legal duty to respect. This particular issue turned more to the argument of what is the purpose of a funeral—to respect the last wishes of the dead or to respect how the living wish to mourn. However, when appealing to the Principle of Autonomy, an individual’s decision to donate organs after death should be respected just as their decision to be cremated or the location of their final resting place would be upheld. Moreover, if Australia were to implement ‘presumed consent’ of organ donation such as Spain,