0:01-0:35– Oli claims that he was aware that without a transplant, his life was running out. He then claims that he was the recipient of a lung transplant, yet he does not believe that organ donation should be compulsory. He goes on to state that the cause of his condition was cystic fibrosis, and that doctors believed he only had approximately 2 years to live on his original lungs. Could his opinion on compulsory donation have been different if the doctors had given him a much shorter time frame for treatment, such as 2 weeks?
0:40-1:20- Oli states that the average waiting period for his transplant is about 18 months, although he did not receive his transplant until after 2 years of waiting for a compatible donor organ to be available. Oli believes that he was living on borrowed time, and that he was waiting for somebody to die essentially. He is stating causally that the fact that he was not able to receive an organ in a timely manner due to a lack of organ availability.
1:20-1:50- Oli claims that he is unable to show the family of his donor an adequate amount of gratitude for the new lease on life that he’s been given (a fruit basket could have been a nice place to start…). Oli treats his new organ as a personal gift rather than a random charity. In conclusion, he makes the following bold statement: “By switching to a system of presumed consent, we’re taking away that element of a gift, and I wouldn’t want to change that for anything.” Oli is claiming that the gift of the organ is equally important, if not more important, than the organ itself. Patients waiting desperately for a transplant may not share Oli’s sentiment towards the “gifting” of organs.