I totally disagree with Diana. In case of a cadaveric donor, the patient is totally death. you can see that in the first article of the law. I mean the brain death. And please, read at least wikipedia. Many countries adopted this policy and the one still has the choice to decide not to become a donor after death. By the way, we discuss this issue at our blog here: http://tumblaw.iblogger.org/2010/06/14/discussion_cadaveric_donors_rights/ Any comments are welcomed

It is a basic human right for an individual to decide if he or she will be an organ donor. This is not a decision to be made by doctors or any hospital official. Not saying "NO" does not mean yes. In order to do an organ procurement, the patient is kept "alive" with a heart-lung machine so that the organs are still getting blood and oxygen. Otherwise, the organ will not be suitable for transplant. It is an indivuduals decision if he or she wants organs removed after they die. Also, when you have unethical people working in the medical field, that doesn't matter. To some doctors, the hypocratic oath means absolutely nothing. They are not in it to treat patients, but to help "steal" organs and line their pockets. This is pathetic practice. It is another perfect example of corruption that is not regulated or monitored in any way. Doctors and hospitals should be losing their license over this. You are not a donor "by default" if you verbally or writtent have not said "NO". Which idiot came up with this law? It certainly must not have been a person with proper medical ethics.