I think this is dangerous territory. Yes people should think about donating organs as you don't need them once your dead. I have permitted my organs to be used in the future. BUT I think the Prime Minister NO RIGHT to make a decision over something so vital to a person. Their body their choice. Maybe instead of forcing people to give up their right to choose, our PM should be educating people and using a campaign to donate organs.

Maybe he should be more forceful when it comes to crushing crime, cruelty and the exploitation of the welfare state. But of course, the dead can't speak back!

What happens if you're in a car accident and your card permits your organs to be used? Will they revive you and nurse you back to health when it is cheaper for the NHS to take your organs?

This is shady territory.

Lyndsy , antrim ,

Judy, Liverpool makes the crucial point in this issue.

It's not whether increasing the hourdes of humans is a good thing or not - because if my wife was ill, I'd expect heaven and earth to be moved to make her well.

But, I wouldn't be happy if just one individual had their organs removed against their will, because the opt-out had been lost.

With opt-out, organs can being removed against one's will is a possibility.

With opt-in, that can't happen.

I have to say, that I would rather have the fail-safe approach.

W Smith, Oldham,

It doesn't really matter whether you can opt out or not. They will 'conveniently' lose your information and do exactly as they please. Never forget, they already have a history of incompetence.

Judy , Liverpool, england

Not content with invading the privacy of an Englishman's castle New Labour is now carving him up without his express permission.

F Cockburn, London, UK

Mr. Brown is not my most favourite Prime Minister either, but this poposal for an opting out scheme is the most sensible thing he has suggested. I had PBC (a genetic liver condition) which resulted in liver failure in 2004 and the only option to save my life was an urgent liver Transplant. The surgeon wanted to transplant immediately but due to the shortage of Donor Organs I had to wait 8 months for a suitable donor liver by which time I was at death's door and almost too ill to be operated on. I was very lucky to be given this chance, but because of the very late intervention I had a string of illnesses including Pneumonia, Blood poisoning, Ascites, Oedema, and Pleural Effusions which required at least 18 chest drains. For the first half of 2005 I was in and out of hospitals and was an in-patient at the Royal Free at time of Transplant needing constant medical attention. Considering all the suffering for me and my family, to me an opting out scheme seems to be the way forward.

Karin Staub-Leigh, Southampton, Hampshire

I would thought that the existence of an opt-out system would go some way to solving the problem of transplant waiting lists...surely the time to worry about bodysnatching is now, when organs are so rare!

There are a lot of comments against such a register, I for one am in favour of it and am already a card-carrying member of the organ donor register. Lets see how many of these dissenting voices are as loud when they or one of their loved ones is waiting for a transplant!

Sarah, Cambridge, UK

Everyone is assuming that prolonging one's life is a good thing. Thought about giving your liver to an alcoholic so he can resume abuse of his silent wife? Or donating your heart to a child, only for him to commit mass murder a few years down the line.

And as with most things, as history dictates, the rich and "privileged" will be given higher priority to organs over those not so well off.

We're turning into China.

Howard, Manchester,

This is long overdue, there are many people who needlessly die every year because a suitable organ cannot be found for them. I understand that the last thing on most grieving relatives minds is the possibility of organ removal but if an opt out system was in place many doctors wouldn't have to disturb the family in order to help a sick but living person have a chance of a replacement organ and a possible full recovery from their illness

ALYSON MORSE, wrexham, north wales

"Over my dead body" is the answer to this charlatan.
Sky rocket taxes over the last decade,robbing pensioners,Taxing the dead and now the ultimate indignity - corpse robbing without implied consent!
This must be the most repugnant, evil, ungodly administration we have ever had.
Crawl back under the stone you originated from Brown and take Nu labor with you.

philip, Ipswich,

Jill of Cambridge : rest easy - they do not transplant organs from the old and sick into young people. There has to be an approximate match in age / organ size as well as the obvious tissue matching.

James of Ohio : We're not all mad - I didn't vote for Blair, and so far, no one has voted for Brown.

Best (cynical) thing the government could do to increase organ supply is to encourage the use of motorbikes, obviously to cut down on congestion and carbon emission ........ surprised they haven't thought of it - two birds with one stone.

Andrew, Oxford, England

Brown has been removing our money, without our consent for 10 years as Chancellor so it comes as no surprise that he intends to do the same with our organs. Happily, at this stage anyway,he intends to leave the organs in-situ until after we are dead!

paul turfery, Cork, Ireland

It is just a matter of time before some poor bastard dies so some rich bastard can live.This is enevitable.It's going to happen.Some rich man's kid is going to need a liver and some poor man's kid is going to disappear.

ron, toronto,

About time. Many people who already do give consent have their rights over turned by relatives.
This system still gives the individual a choice. The choice to potentially save a life or to opt out.

A Donor, Leicester,

I think this is a great idea. I'm a blood donor and have registered with the organ donation services. I've told my nearest & dearest that I want my organs to be used to help those in need in the event of my demise. There is no point in keeping perfectly good organs in dead bodies when there are thousands of people whose lives could be saved.

There's little chance of doctors prematurely bumping off the elderly or very ill in order to supply organs to others. The Hippocratic Oath prevents it, and I'm sure that any such activity would stand out to other healtchare professionals and would swiftly be brought to book.

Oz, London,

My God! _When_ will the British state be sated in its expansion of control over citizens' lives?

Why do you folks vote for these people? I'm guessing it's like here -- choose between Tweedledee or Tweedledum. If not, you are all mad.

James, Columbus, Ohio, USA

I think this is a servere retrograde step and a reminder of the grim bodysnatchers of previous centuries sold cadavers to the medical profession for experimentation. How are the old and weak ,and those who do not have relatives, going to be able to feel reassured that maybe the vital medical help needed to save or prolong their life will not be witheld because their death might be hastened in order to obtain their body parts. There are unscrupulous people to be found in all walks of life as well as various occupations and professions ,including the medical profession. One must not be naive here. As a pensioner, I will now feel terrified of going into hospital in case someone thinks my time ought to be up in order to supply an organ or two to a more "deserving" young person. I am sure I am not alone her.e in feeling this.

JIll, Cambridge, United Kingdom