abbey, the tests done on someone to confirm death are the same as if there was to be no donation of organs. The body is then kept on life support for two days and all the tests done again before the organs are removed.
I have absolute confidence that my sister had died long before the organs were taken. She received what was essentially a fatal head injury in an accident and doctors and surgeons fought for two days to see if they could possibly save her life.
I do not think your financial argument is very strong. Any treatment for anything costs money. if we cannot afford to pay for transplants and anti rejection drugs what about incredibly expensive cancer treatments where the cost of one course of treatment can exceed a lifetimes prescription for anti-rejection drugs, or all those on very expensive drugs to stop HIV becoming full blown AIDS. Not to mention those being treated for high blood pressure or Type 2 diabetes that can clearly be linked to life-style. Or highly expensive treatment for children born with life-limiting conditions where the chances of the treatment working at all or enough to make real changes in their condition is very uncertain.
I realise that decisions do need to be taken on priorities in the NHS, but I see no reason why money spent on transplant and anti rejection drugs should be singled out for cutting. They are, economically, very effective treatments. Most recipients are of working age and can get back to work and be healthy for decades. As well as paying tax on their income they can support their families who, if they had died might otherwise have been dependent on state benefits for many years.
