"Opt-out" organ procurement policies based on presumed consent are typically advertised as being superior to "opt-in" policies based on explicit consent at securing organs for transplantation. However, Michael Gill (2004) has argued that presumed consent policies are also better than opt-in policies at respecting patient autonomy. According to Gill's Fewer Mistakes Argument, we ought to implement the procurement policy that results in the fewest frustrated wishes regarding organ donation. Given that the majority of Americans wish to donate their organs, it is plausible that a presumed consent policy would result in fewer frustrated wishes compared to the current opt-in policy. It follows that we ought to implement a policy of presumed consent. In this paper, I first consider and find wanting an objection to the Fewer Mistakes Argument developed recently by Douglas MacKay (2015). I also consider an objection put forth by James Taylor (2012) but argue that there is a methodological reason to prefer my own argument to Taylor's. Finally, I argue for two theses: first, that Gill's major argument in favor of the crucial premise of the Fewer Mistakes Argument is flawed, and second, that the major premise of the Fewer Mistakes Argument is false.

中文翻译：

---

更少的错误和推定的同意

基于推定同意的“选择退出”器官采购政策通常被宣传为优于基于明确同意的“选择加入”政策，以确保移植器官。然而，迈克尔·吉尔（Michael Gill，2004 年）认为，在尊重患者自主权方面，假定同意政策也优于选择加入政策。根据吉尔的更少错误论证，我们应该实施导致器官捐赠受挫意愿最少的采购政策。鉴于大多数美国人希望捐赠他们的器官，与当前的选择加入政策相比，假定同意政策会导致更少的受挫意愿是合理的。因此，我们应该实施推定同意政策。在本文中，我首先考虑并发现想要反对 Douglas MacKay（2015 年）最近提出的更少错误论证。我还考虑了 James Taylor (2012) 提出的反对意见，但认为有方法论上的理由更喜欢我自己的论点而不是 Taylor 的论点。最后，我论证两个论点：第一，吉尔支持较少错误论证的关键前提的主要论证是有缺陷的，其次，较少错误论证的主要前提是错误的。