Human Organ Transplant Act- How far is it viable to forego consent in harvesting organs? What recommendations and guidelines would you implement to so

"Before HOTA, we could only save 5 lives a year. After HOTA, we now save a life a week. This is the reality of HOTA. HOTA is good both for the dead and the living. But we respect the wishes of those who want to opt out of HOTA. We will facilitate it. Every year, about 2,500 opt out of HOTA. The number went up soon after the SGH incident but has since come down to 80 a day. I respect the wishes of those who opted out but I worry for the poor patients on the organ waiting list.", said Mr Khaw Boon Wan, Minister for Health.

However true that HOTA has saved many lives of people, it is definitely not viable to forego consent in harvesting organs. The act kicks in right after a person is certified dead. One of the main controversy here is ethical concerns. We are being unethical to take someone else's organs and let it be "used" in another person's body without permission. Some might argue that as long as it could save a life, as long as it does not affect the dead which is always true, the ethical concerns does not matter. But I think that it is not right as a person to take anyone's even the deceased organs without his/her permission, it is no different from stealing and this should not be the case which the government also must not encourage to do. Imagine a rich family who is so loaded that it could last them for thousands of years of living, indirectly meaning that taking some money from them would not affect a single bit of their living. If we support the HOTA, we are coming to an agreement where everybody is right to steal/rob from this wealthy family as long as you do it discreetly. This is totally wrong and unethical, so is HOTA. Even if the people would starve and die if they do not steal, it is still wrong as a person, as a man, as a human, to do so unless the family is willing to donate the money. Therefore, it is definitely not viable to forego consent in harvesting organs.

Currently, one must opt out for oneself, while one is alive and able to do so, meaning that one's family cannot opt out on one's behalf once one is in a coma,etc. Moreover, if you opt out of HOTA, you will receive lower priority on the organ transplant waiting list, if you ever need a transplant and this rule also applies to those not covered by HOTA (i.e. Age < 21 or > 60, and Muslims who have not opted in). Looking from these regulations, I wonder where have our democratic nation gone to. It is simply ridiculous to discredit those who are unwilling to carry out HOTA and give priority to those working classes if they ever need a transplant. I feel that this is a very unfair treatment. Besides, it also meant that HOTA can also be carried out even without the person's permission if he had a sudden death.

I recommend that if such cases occur, every action has to be agreed upon all the next of kin of the deceased. We never know if the deceased himself agrees upon it or not. Although some might argue that if he disagreed why did not he opt out earlier? If he opt out, it would meant that he will be given lower priority for organ tranplants if he ever need. Who would do something that would negatively affect themselves? I think that HOTA is playing mind games with the people and forcing and leaving us with the best choice which is not to opt out of it. Hence, I think that we must obtain the permissions of all the deceased next of kin before HOTA can be implemented.