BACKGROUND The organ donor shortfall in the UK has prompted calls to introduce legislation to allow for presumed consent: if there is no explicit objection to donation of an organ, consent should be presumed. The current debate has not taken in account accepted meanings of presumption in law and science and the consequences for rights of ownership that would arise should presumed consent become law. In addition, arguments revolve around the rights of the competent autonomous adult but do not always consider the more serious implications for children or the disabled. DISCUSSION Any action or decision made on a presumption is accepted in law and science as one based on judgement of a provisional situation. It should therefore allow the possibility of reversing the action or decision. Presumed consent to organ donation will not permit such reversal. Placing prime importance on the functionality of body organs and their capacity to sustain life rather than on explicit consent of the individual will lead to further debate about rights of ownership and potentially to questions about financial incentives and to whom benefits should accrue. Factors that influence donor rates are not fully understood and attitudes of the public to presumed consent require further investigation. Presuming consent will also necessitate considering how such a measure would be applied in situations involving children and mentally incompetent adults. SUMMARY The presumption of consent to organ donation cannot be understood in the same way as is presumption when applied to science or law. Consideration should be given to the consequences of presuming consent and to the questions of ownership and organ monetary value as these questions are likely to arise should presumed consent be permitted. In addition, the implications of presumed consent on children and adults who are unable to object to organ donation, requires serious contemplation if these most vulnerable members of society are to be protected.

中文翻译：

---

当我们假定同意时，假定什么？

背景 英国的器官捐献者短缺促使人们呼吁立法允许推定同意：如果没有明确反对捐献器官，则应推定同意。当前的辩论没有考虑到法律和科学中公认的推定含义，以及推定同意成为法律时对所有权产生的后果。此外，争论围绕有能力自主的成年人的权利，但并不总是考虑对儿童或残疾人更严重的影响。讨论 根据推定做出的任何行动或决定在法律和科学中都被认为是基于对临时情况的判断。因此，它应该允许撤销行动或决定的可能性。假定同意器官捐献不会允许这种逆转。将身体器官的功能及其维持生命的能力放在首位，而不是个人的明确同意，将导致有关所有权的进一步辩论，并可能引发有关经济激励和谁应受益的问题。影响捐赠率的因素尚未完全了解，公众对推定同意的态度需要进一步调查。假定同意还需要考虑如何在涉及儿童和精神上无行为能力的成年人的情况下应用此类措施。摘要 同意器官捐献的推定不能以与应用于科学或法律的推定相同的方式来理解。应考虑推定同意的后果以及所有权和器官货币价值问题，因为如果允许推定同意，这些问题可能会出现。此外，如果要保护这些最脆弱的社会成员，则需要认真考虑推定同意对无法反对器官捐赠的儿童和成人的影响。