INTRODUCTION: In November 2007, a legislative initiative regarding the presumed consent for organ donation was proposed for parliamentary debate in Romania and was followed by public debate. The study aimed to asses public opinions expressed in the Romanian media. MATERIALS AND METHODS: An Internet search was made. The pro and con reasons, the affiliation of parts involved in the debate and suggested future direction of action were identified. RESULTS: The Internet search had 8572 results. The parts involved in the pro and con debate consisted of governmental structures, physicians, ethicists, politicians, media, religious authorities, nongovernmental associations, and lay persons. The main pros were the low rate of organ donation and the long waiting lists, enhancement of organ procurement, avoidance of wasting valuable organs, avoiding responsibility, and the stress imposed to the family in giving the donation consent, humanitarian purposes (saving lives), going along with the scientific progress, and less bureaucracy. The main cons were an unethical issue, violation of human rights, denial of brain death, unethical advantage of public ignorance, unethical use of underprivileged people, little results in terms of organ procurement, but huge negative effects on public opinion, public mistrust in transplant programs and impossibility of refusal identification due to particularities of the Romanian medical system. CONCLUSION: The con opinions prevailed. For the moment, Romania seems to be unprepared to accept presumed consent. A future change in public perception regarding organ transplantation may modify the terms of a public debate.
INTRODUCTION: In November 2007, a legislative initiative regarding the presumed consent for organ donation was proposed for parliamentary debate in Romania and was followed by public debate. The study aimed to asses public opinions expressed in the Romanian media. MATERIALS AND METHODS: An Internet search was made. The pro and con reasons, the affiliation of parts involved in the debate and suggested future direction of action were identified. RESULTS: The Internet search had 8572 results. The parts involved in the pro and con debate consisted of governmental structures, physicians, ethicists, politicians, media, religious authorities, nongovernmental associations, and lay persons. The main pros were the low rate of organ donation and the long waiting lists, enhancement of organ procurement, avoidance of wasting valuable organs, avoiding responsibility, and the stress imposed to the family in giving the donation consent, humanitarian purposes (saving lives), going along with the scientific progress, and less bureaucracy. The main cons were an unethical issue, violation of human rights, denial of brain death, unethical advantage of public ignorance, unethical use of underprivileged people, little results in terms of organ procurement, but huge negative effects on public opinion, public mistrust in transplant programs and impossibility of refusal identification due to particularities of the Romanian medical system. CONCLUSION: The con opinions prevailed. For the moment, Romania seems to be unprepared to accept presumed consent. A future change in public perception regarding organ transplantation may modify the terms of a public debate.