Recent comments in /f/UpliftingNews

notpeternotpete t1_j4s184i wrote

Nope! She intentionally wanted to start the chain.

The transplant team’s social worker and clinical psychiatrist did require her to have conversations with my father, my siblings and I individually to talk about how we’d feel if we did someday need a kidney and she wasn’t able to donate to us - we all felt the same way, which was that we didn’t feel that she owed us even the potential of a kidney donation, much less the organ itself. Thought that was an interesting part of the process!

99

PhiloPhys t1_j4rskwd wrote

Those many people are absolutely correct. We are essentially taking 0 action at the present moment. Atmospheric CO2 represents only one of 7 planetary boundaries that spell our destruction. We’ve arguably crossed 4-6 of them already and nothing is being done about most of them.

More deforestation, habitat loss, resource use, and energy use are happening than ever before. We’re still building new car and fossil infrastructure which will cement use of those institutions for 40+ more years.

There is hope and we can do something. But, presently we are essentially doing nothing.

We will not green technology our way out of this. We need system level change.

4

PhiloPhys t1_j4rrwwi wrote

Wrong. Decoupling is not happening. Production is increasing with the new energy sources which is extremely bad. We’re using more fuel and more renewable energy simultaneously. That means we’re stripping more raw resources from the earth than ever, deforesting more, displacing more creatures, and driving our planet to the brink.

Renewables are not a silver bullet. They are only a tiny piece of an actual solution. We are not doing anything that needs to be done.

Putting all our belief in renewables as a solution is just capitalism reskinned as green.

Edit: that’s not to say all hope is lost. There are still beautiful futures.

0

the_pinklemon t1_j4rpn64 wrote

If I understood the article correctly, this family signed up for the scheme but the daughter got a kidney anyway without him being forced to donate his. But, he decided to still donate to someone.

The way they framed it at least, it sounded like he was basically given a get out of jail free card for some reason, and could’ve opted not to donate even after his daughter received a kidney. But he still chose to, which I think is kinda the story.

25

Astavri t1_j4rp35n wrote

Paired organ donation is what it's called.

The only living donor without benefit is an alturistic kidney donor. They, nor their family receive anything for it, so they don't do a kidney exchange, they just give a kidney.

This article is a bit misleading or unclear, im not sure if his daughter received a kidney from a deceased donor or a living one or if it was a "paired match" type of donation as you mentioned.

It sounds like his daughter got a kidney, and he, after, decided to be an alturistic donor. But I'm not sure.

https://www.mayoclinic.org/tests-procedures/nondirected-living-donor/pyc-20384850

Edit: looks like it was a living donor scheme so exactly as you said with matching other families. He was doing it in exchange for his daughter. Not to be pessimistic but he did it for a reason. Someone gave his daughter a life changing present and he gave them a life changing present.

Very very few living donors are allturistic ones.

I don't know why but I read up on the most random things.

27