❓ The Minister for Health outlines initiatives to improve organ and tissue donation rates in WA, including legislative amendments, a dedicated coordinator, and a national review.
AnsweredQoN 236Legislative Assembly
QuestionView source ↗
Can the minister advise what he is doing to improve the rate of organ and tissue donation in Western Australia? Mr J.A. McGINTY
AnswerView source ↗
I thank the member for this question and I acknowledge his very strong personal interest in and commitment to this issue. Western Australia has for too long been the cinderella State when it comes to organ donation. It is time that strong action was taken to enhance the level of organ and tissue donation in this State. Not only does the successful donation of organs and tissues change the quality of life for many people who are the beneficiaries, the recipients of those donations, but also in many cases it saves human lives. People are dying in Western Australia because of the shortage of donors for various tissues and organs. Three very important initiatives have been undertaken in this area. First, members will be aware that the notice paper contains amendments to the Coroners Act that are designed to broaden the range of people from whom donations can be received to include those people who have died outside of a hospital. That will mean that things like heart valves and corneas are donated at a greater rate - we hope the effect of the legislation will be that those sorts of tissues are donated at a greater rate than is currently the case. Secondly, we have appointed a medical donor coordinator at the Sir Charles Gairdner Hospital. I am told that that hospital is in a very poor state with organ donation. It had amongst the lowest rates and is a hospital that one would have expected to be amongst the highest. I am delighted to have recently approved the appointment of Dr Harry Moody as the medical donor coordinator at the Sir Charles Gairdner Hospital. He will be responsible each day for liaising with people in the emergency department, in the intensive care area and with families to dramatically increase the incidence of organ donation through that hospital by administrative action rather than necessarily any change in the law. If the program is successful there, where it is being trialled, we will seek to have it extended to other major hospitals in Western Australia. I am told by people who have made a study of this matter, including my good friend the member for Southern River, that in this area what has occurred in Spain is a model for the rest of the world; that is, if this procedure is driven administratively in the hospitals, the extent of organ donation is maximised. I am pleased that Dr Moody has taken up that post and I am hopeful that we will be able to report later in the year on a significant increase in the rate of organ donation. Mr M.F. Board: I think they are excellent moves. Have you considered the opt-out rather than the opt-in option? Mr J.A. McGINTY: I am coming to that. The third initiative is one that was discussed with my good friend Tony Abbott at the recent health ministers’ meeting. Mr M.F. Board: At the love-in. Mr J.A. McGINTY: The member does not like that. A resolution, which I helped draft at that meeting and which had the strong support of Minister Abbott, recognised that Australia had appallingly low rates of organ donation and that a range of initiatives, including, if need be, changes to the legislation governing organ and tissue donation, should be reviewed. We have undertaken a review of the state legislation and, interestingly, because I was not personally aware of this, the existing legislation provides that if the person making the donation, the deceased, had during his or her life made a clear expression of a desire to become a donor, such as signing a drivers licence application form or something of that nature, that should be honoured and there is no legal impediment to that being given full effect. However, if somebody had not become an organ donor or was not on the register of organ donors, the consent of the next of kin was necessary. Unfortunately, the practice in Western Australia does not accord with the statutory provision. The families are given a right of veto and approval is requested for somebody who had during his or her lifetime indicated that he or she wished to become an organ donor. The resolution carried by the health ministers some two or three weeks ago was to the effect that we should review the legislation to ensure that the wishes of the person, when alive, to become an organ donor should, to the maximum extent possible, be unfettered. Clearly, if a family has a vehement objection, no clinician will remove organs in the face of that objection. However, there are many administrative ways in which this matter can be addressed with greater effect, and by “effect” I mean be able to obtain those organs. As a result, we will be reviewing the protocols that exist in the hospital to give effect to the wording of the legislation, which is currently, in my view, not in need of amendment. I am hopeful that by the end of this year we will be able to report on a significant improvement in this life-saving area.
Mr J.A. McGINTY replied: I thank the member for this question and I acknowledge his very strong personal interest in and commitment to this issue. Western Australia has for too long been the cinderella State when it comes to organ donation. It is time that strong action was taken to enhance the level of organ and tissue donation in this State. Not only does the successful donation of organs and tissues change the quality of life for many people who are the beneficiaries, the recipients of those donations, but also in many cases it saves human lives. People are dying in Western Australia because of the shortage of donors for various tissues and organs. Three very important initiatives have been undertaken in this area. First, members will be aware that the notice paper contains amendments to the Coroners Act that are designed to broaden the range of people from whom donations can be received to include those people who have died outside of a hospital. That will mean that things like heart valves and corneas are donated at a greater rate - we hope the effect of the legislation will be that those sorts of tissues are donated at a greater rate than is currently the case. Secondly, we have appointed a medical donor coordinator at the Sir Charles Gairdner Hospital. I am told that that hospital is in a very poor state with organ donation. It had amongst the lowest rates and is a hospital that one would have expected to be amongst the highest. I am delighted to have recently approved the appointment of Dr Harry Moody as the medical donor coordinator at the Sir Charles Gairdner Hospital. He will be responsible each day for liaising with people in the emergency department, in the intensive care area and with families to dramatically increase the incidence of organ donation through that hospital by administrative action rather than necessarily any change in the law. If the program is successful there, where it is being trialled, we will seek to have it extended to other major hospitals in Western Australia. I am told by people who have made a study of this matter, including my good friend the member for Southern River, that in this area what has occurred in Spain is a model for the rest of the world; that is, if this procedure is driven administratively in the hospitals, the extent of organ donation is maximised. I am pleased that Dr Moody has taken up that post and I am hopeful that we will be able to report later in the year on a significant increase in the rate of organ donation. Mr M.F. Board: I think they are excellent moves. Have you considered the opt-out rather than the opt-in option? Mr J.A. McGINTY: I am coming to that. The third initiative is one that was discussed with my good friend Tony Abbott at the recent health ministers’ meeting. Mr M.F. Board: At the love-in. Mr J.A. McGINTY: The member does not like that. A resolution, which I helped draft at that meeting and which had the strong support of Minister Abbott, recognised that Australia had appallingly low rates of organ donation and that a range of initiatives, including, if need be, changes to the legislation governing organ and tissue donation, should be reviewed. We have undertaken a review of the state legislation and, interestingly, because I was not personally aware of this, the existing legislation provides that if the person making the donation, the deceased, had during his or her life made a clear expression of a desire to become a donor, such as signing a drivers licence application form or something of that nature, that should be honoured and there is no legal impediment to that being given full effect. However, if somebody had not become an organ donor or was not on the register of organ donors, the consent of the next of kin was necessary. Unfortunately, the practice in Western Australia does not accord with the statutory provision. The families are given a right of veto and approval is requested for somebody who had during his or her lifetime indicated that he or she wished to become an organ donor. The resolution carried by the health ministers some two or three weeks ago was to the effect that we should review the legislation to ensure that the wishes of the person, when alive, to become an organ donor should, to the maximum extent possible, be unfettered. Clearly, if a family has a vehement objection, no clinician will remove organs in the face of that objection. However, there are many administrative ways in which this matter can be addressed with greater effect, and by “effect” I mean be able to obtain those organs. As a result, we will be reviewing the protocols that exist in the hospital to give effect to the wording of the legislation, which is currently, in my view, not in need of amendment. I am hopeful that by the end of this year we will be able to report on a significant improvement in this life-saving area.
I thank the member for this question and I acknowledge his very strong personal interest in and commitment to this issue. Western Australia has for too long been the cinderella State when it comes to organ donation. It is time that strong action was taken to enhance the level of organ and tissue donation in this State. Not only does the successful donation of organs and tissues change the quality of life for many people who are the beneficiaries, the recipients of those donations, but also in many cases it saves human lives. People are dying in Western Australia because of the shortage of donors for various tissues and organs. Three very important initiatives have been undertaken in this area. First, members will be aware that the notice paper contains amendments to the Coroners Act that are designed to broaden the range of people from whom donations can be received to include those people who have died outside of a hospital. That will mean that things like heart valves and corneas are donated at a greater rate - we hope the effect of the legislation will be that those sorts of tissues are donated at a greater rate than is currently the case. Secondly, we have appointed a medical donor coordinator at the Sir Charles Gairdner Hospital. I am told that that hospital is in a very poor state with organ donation. It had amongst the lowest rates and is a hospital that one would have expected to be amongst the highest. I am delighted to have recently approved the appointment of Dr Harry Moody as the medical donor coordinator at the Sir Charles Gairdner Hospital. He will be responsible each day for liaising with people in the emergency department, in the intensive care area and with families to dramatically increase the incidence of organ donation through that hospital by administrative action rather than necessarily any change in the law. If the program is successful there, where it is being trialled, we will seek to have it extended to other major hospitals in Western Australia. I am told by people who have made a study of this matter, including my good friend the member for Southern River, that in this area what has occurred in Spain is a model for the rest of the world; that is, if this procedure is driven administratively in the hospitals, the extent of organ donation is maximised. I am pleased that Dr Moody has taken up that post and I am hopeful that we will be able to report later in the year on a significant increase in the rate of organ donation. Mr M.F. Board: I think they are excellent moves. Have you considered the opt-out rather than the opt-in option? Mr J.A. McGINTY: I am coming to that. The third initiative is one that was discussed with my good friend Tony Abbott at the recent health ministers’ meeting. Mr M.F. Board: At the love-in. Mr J.A. McGINTY: The member does not like that. A resolution, which I helped draft at that meeting and which had the strong support of Minister Abbott, recognised that Australia had appallingly low rates of organ donation and that a range of initiatives, including, if need be, changes to the legislation governing organ and tissue donation, should be reviewed. We have undertaken a review of the state legislation and, interestingly, because I was not personally aware of this, the existing legislation provides that if the person making the donation, the deceased, had during his or her life made a clear expression of a desire to become a donor, such as signing a drivers licence application form or something of that nature, that should be honoured and there is no legal impediment to that being given full effect. However, if somebody had not become an organ donor or was not on the register of organ donors, the consent of the next of kin was necessary. Unfortunately, the practice in Western Australia does not accord with the statutory provision. The families are given a right of veto and approval is requested for somebody who had during his or her lifetime indicated that he or she wished to become an organ donor. The resolution carried by the health ministers some two or three weeks ago was to the effect that we should review the legislation to ensure that the wishes of the person, when alive, to become an organ donor should, to the maximum extent possible, be unfettered. Clearly, if a family has a vehement objection, no clinician will remove organs in the face of that objection. However, there are many administrative ways in which this matter can be addressed with greater effect, and by “effect” I mean be able to obtain those organs. As a result, we will be reviewing the protocols that exist in the hospital to give effect to the wording of the legislation, which is currently, in my view, not in need of amendment. I am hopeful that by the end of this year we will be able to report on a significant improvement in this life-saving area.
Three very important initiatives have been undertaken in this area. First, members will be aware that the notice paper contains amendments to the Coroners Act that are designed to broaden the range of people from whom donations can be received to include those people who have died outside of a hospital. That will mean that things like heart valves and corneas are donated at a greater rate - we hope the effect of the legislation will be that those sorts of tissues are donated at a greater rate than is currently the case. Secondly, we have appointed a medical donor coordinator at the Sir Charles Gairdner Hospital. I am told that that hospital is in a very poor state with organ donation. It had amongst the lowest rates and is a hospital that one would have expected to be amongst the highest. I am delighted to have recently approved the appointment of Dr Harry Moody as the medical donor coordinator at the Sir Charles Gairdner Hospital. He will be responsible each day for liaising with people in the emergency department, in the intensive care area and with families to dramatically increase the incidence of organ donation through that hospital by administrative action rather than necessarily any change in the law. If the program is successful there, where it is being trialled, we will seek to have it extended to other major hospitals in Western Australia. I am told by people who have made a study of this matter, including my good friend the member for Southern River, that in this area what has occurred in Spain is a model for the rest of the world; that is, if this procedure is driven administratively in the hospitals, the extent of organ donation is maximised. I am pleased that Dr Moody has taken up that post and I am hopeful that we will be able to report later in the year on a significant increase in the rate of organ donation. Mr M.F. Board: I think they are excellent moves. Have you considered the opt-out rather than the opt-in option? Mr J.A. McGINTY: I am coming to that. The third initiative is one that was discussed with my good friend Tony Abbott at the recent health ministers’ meeting. Mr M.F. Board: At the love-in. Mr J.A. McGINTY: The member does not like that. A resolution, which I helped draft at that meeting and which had the strong support of Minister Abbott, recognised that Australia had appallingly low rates of organ donation and that a range of initiatives, including, if need be, changes to the legislation governing organ and tissue donation, should be reviewed. We have undertaken a review of the state legislation and, interestingly, because I was not personally aware of this, the existing legislation provides that if the person making the donation, the deceased, had during his or her life made a clear expression of a desire to become a donor, such as signing a drivers licence application form or something of that nature, that should be honoured and there is no legal impediment to that being given full effect. However, if somebody had not become an organ donor or was not on the register of organ donors, the consent of the next of kin was necessary. Unfortunately, the practice in Western Australia does not accord with the statutory provision. The families are given a right of veto and approval is requested for somebody who had during his or her lifetime indicated that he or she wished to become an organ donor. The resolution carried by the health ministers some two or three weeks ago was to the effect that we should review the legislation to ensure that the wishes of the person, when alive, to become an organ donor should, to the maximum extent possible, be unfettered. Clearly, if a family has a vehement objection, no clinician will remove organs in the face of that objection. However, there are many administrative ways in which this matter can be addressed with greater effect, and by “effect” I mean be able to obtain those organs. As a result, we will be reviewing the protocols that exist in the hospital to give effect to the wording of the legislation, which is currently, in my view, not in need of amendment. I am hopeful that by the end of this year we will be able to report on a significant improvement in this life-saving area.
Mr M.F. Board: I think they are excellent moves. Have you considered the opt-out rather than the opt-in option? Mr J.A. McGINTY: I am coming to that. The third initiative is one that was discussed with my good friend Tony Abbott at the recent health ministers’ meeting. Mr M.F. Board: At the love-in. Mr J.A. McGINTY: The member does not like that. A resolution, which I helped draft at that meeting and which had the strong support of Minister Abbott, recognised that Australia had appallingly low rates of organ donation and that a range of initiatives, including, if need be, changes to the legislation governing organ and tissue donation, should be reviewed. We have undertaken a review of the state legislation and, interestingly, because I was not personally aware of this, the existing legislation provides that if the person making the donation, the deceased, had during his or her life made a clear expression of a desire to become a donor, such as signing a drivers licence application form or something of that nature, that should be honoured and there is no legal impediment to that being given full effect. However, if somebody had not become an organ donor or was not on the register of organ donors, the consent of the next of kin was necessary. Unfortunately, the practice in Western Australia does not accord with the statutory provision. The families are given a right of veto and approval is requested for somebody who had during his or her lifetime indicated that he or she wished to become an organ donor. The resolution carried by the health ministers some two or three weeks ago was to the effect that we should review the legislation to ensure that the wishes of the person, when alive, to become an organ donor should, to the maximum extent possible, be unfettered. Clearly, if a family has a vehement objection, no clinician will remove organs in the face of that objection. However, there are many administrative ways in which this matter can be addressed with greater effect, and by “effect” I mean be able to obtain those organs. As a result, we will be reviewing the protocols that exist in the hospital to give effect to the wording of the legislation, which is currently, in my view, not in need of amendment. I am hopeful that by the end of this year we will be able to report on a significant improvement in this life-saving area.
Mr J.A. McGINTY: I am coming to that. The third initiative is one that was discussed with my good friend Tony Abbott at the recent health ministers’ meeting. Mr M.F. Board: At the love-in. Mr J.A. McGINTY: The member does not like that. A resolution, which I helped draft at that meeting and which had the strong support of Minister Abbott, recognised that Australia had appallingly low rates of organ donation and that a range of initiatives, including, if need be, changes to the legislation governing organ and tissue donation, should be reviewed. We have undertaken a review of the state legislation and, interestingly, because I was not personally aware of this, the existing legislation provides that if the person making the donation, the deceased, had during his or her life made a clear expression of a desire to become a donor, such as signing a drivers licence application form or something of that nature, that should be honoured and there is no legal impediment to that being given full effect. However, if somebody had not become an organ donor or was not on the register of organ donors, the consent of the next of kin was necessary. Unfortunately, the practice in Western Australia does not accord with the statutory provision. The families are given a right of veto and approval is requested for somebody who had during his or her lifetime indicated that he or she wished to become an organ donor. The resolution carried by the health ministers some two or three weeks ago was to the effect that we should review the legislation to ensure that the wishes of the person, when alive, to become an organ donor should, to the maximum extent possible, be unfettered. Clearly, if a family has a vehement objection, no clinician will remove organs in the face of that objection. However, there are many administrative ways in which this matter can be addressed with greater effect, and by “effect” I mean be able to obtain those organs. As a result, we will be reviewing the protocols that exist in the hospital to give effect to the wording of the legislation, which is currently, in my view, not in need of amendment. I am hopeful that by the end of this year we will be able to report on a significant improvement in this life-saving area.
Mr M.F. Board: At the love-in. Mr J.A. McGINTY: The member does not like that. A resolution, which I helped draft at that meeting and which had the strong support of Minister Abbott, recognised that Australia had appallingly low rates of organ donation and that a range of initiatives, including, if need be, changes to the legislation governing organ and tissue donation, should be reviewed. We have undertaken a review of the state legislation and, interestingly, because I was not personally aware of this, the existing legislation provides that if the person making the donation, the deceased, had during his or her life made a clear expression of a desire to become a donor, such as signing a drivers licence application form or something of that nature, that should be honoured and there is no legal impediment to that being given full effect. However, if somebody had not become an organ donor or was not on the register of organ donors, the consent of the next of kin was necessary. Unfortunately, the practice in Western Australia does not accord with the statutory provision. The families are given a right of veto and approval is requested for somebody who had during his or her lifetime indicated that he or she wished to become an organ donor. The resolution carried by the health ministers some two or three weeks ago was to the effect that we should review the legislation to ensure that the wishes of the person, when alive, to become an organ donor should, to the maximum extent possible, be unfettered. Clearly, if a family has a vehement objection, no clinician will remove organs in the face of that objection. However, there are many administrative ways in which this matter can be addressed with greater effect, and by “effect” I mean be able to obtain those organs. As a result, we will be reviewing the protocols that exist in the hospital to give effect to the wording of the legislation, which is currently, in my view, not in need of amendment. I am hopeful that by the end of this year we will be able to report on a significant improvement in this life-saving area.
Mr J.A. McGINTY: The member does not like that. A resolution, which I helped draft at that meeting and which had the strong support of Minister Abbott, recognised that Australia had appallingly low rates of organ donation and that a range of initiatives, including, if need be, changes to the legislation governing organ and tissue donation, should be reviewed. We have undertaken a review of the state legislation and, interestingly, because I was not personally aware of this, the existing legislation provides that if the person making the donation, the deceased, had during his or her life made a clear expression of a desire to become a donor, such as signing a drivers licence application form or something of that nature, that should be honoured and there is no legal impediment to that being given full effect. However, if somebody had not become an organ donor or was not on the register of organ donors, the consent of the next of kin was necessary. Unfortunately, the practice in Western Australia does not accord with the statutory provision. The families are given a right of veto and approval is requested for somebody who had during his or her lifetime indicated that he or she wished to become an organ donor. The resolution carried by the health ministers some two or three weeks ago was to the effect that we should review the legislation to ensure that the wishes of the person, when alive, to become an organ donor should, to the maximum extent possible, be unfettered. Clearly, if a family has a vehement objection, no clinician will remove organs in the face of that objection. However, there are many administrative ways in which this matter can be addressed with greater effect, and by “effect” I mean be able to obtain those organs. As a result, we will be reviewing the protocols that exist in the hospital to give effect to the wording of the legislation, which is currently, in my view, not in need of amendment. I am hopeful that by the end of this year we will be able to report on a significant improvement in this life-saving area.
Mr J.A. McGINTY replied: I thank the member for this question and I acknowledge his very strong personal interest in and commitment to this issue. Western Australia has for too long been the cinderella State when it comes to organ donation. It is time that strong action was taken to enhance the level of organ and tissue donation in this State. Not only does the successful donation of organs and tissues change the quality of life for many people who are the beneficiaries, the recipients of those donations, but also in many cases it saves human lives. People are dying in Western Australia because of the shortage of donors for various tissues and organs. Three very important initiatives have been undertaken in this area. First, members will be aware that the notice paper contains amendments to the Coroners Act that are designed to broaden the range of people from whom donations can be received to include those people who have died outside of a hospital. That will mean that things like heart valves and corneas are donated at a greater rate - we hope the effect of the legislation will be that those sorts of tissues are donated at a greater rate than is currently the case. Secondly, we have appointed a medical donor coordinator at the Sir Charles Gairdner Hospital. I am told that that hospital is in a very poor state with organ donation. It had amongst the lowest rates and is a hospital that one would have expected to be amongst the highest. I am delighted to have recently approved the appointment of Dr Harry Moody as the medical donor coordinator at the Sir Charles Gairdner Hospital. He will be responsible each day for liaising with people in the emergency department, in the intensive care area and with families to dramatically increase the incidence of organ donation through that hospital by administrative action rather than necessarily any change in the law. If the program is successful there, where it is being trialled, we will seek to have it extended to other major hospitals in Western Australia. I am told by people who have made a study of this matter, including my good friend the member for Southern River, that in this area what has occurred in Spain is a model for the rest of the world; that is, if this procedure is driven administratively in the hospitals, the extent of organ donation is maximised. I am pleased that Dr Moody has taken up that post and I am hopeful that we will be able to report later in the year on a significant increase in the rate of organ donation. Mr M.F. Board: I think they are excellent moves. Have you considered the opt-out rather than the opt-in option? Mr J.A. McGINTY: I am coming to that. The third initiative is one that was discussed with my good friend Tony Abbott at the recent health ministers’ meeting. Mr M.F. Board: At the love-in. Mr J.A. McGINTY: The member does not like that. A resolution, which I helped draft at that meeting and which had the strong support of Minister Abbott, recognised that Australia had appallingly low rates of organ donation and that a range of initiatives, including, if need be, changes to the legislation governing organ and tissue donation, should be reviewed. We have undertaken a review of the state legislation and, interestingly, because I was not personally aware of this, the existing legislation provides that if the person making the donation, the deceased, had during his or her life made a clear expression of a desire to become a donor, such as signing a drivers licence application form or something of that nature, that should be honoured and there is no legal impediment to that being given full effect. However, if somebody had not become an organ donor or was not on the register of organ donors, the consent of the next of kin was necessary. Unfortunately, the practice in Western Australia does not accord with the statutory provision. The families are given a right of veto and approval is requested for somebody who had during his or her lifetime indicated that he or she wished to become an organ donor. The resolution carried by the health ministers some two or three weeks ago was to the effect that we should review the legislation to ensure that the wishes of the person, when alive, to become an organ donor should, to the maximum extent possible, be unfettered. Clearly, if a family has a vehement objection, no clinician will remove organs in the face of that objection. However, there are many administrative ways in which this matter can be addressed with greater effect, and by “effect” I mean be able to obtain those organs. As a result, we will be reviewing the protocols that exist in the hospital to give effect to the wording of the legislation, which is currently, in my view, not in need of amendment. I am hopeful that by the end of this year we will be able to report on a significant improvement in this life-saving area.
I thank the member for this question and I acknowledge his very strong personal interest in and commitment to this issue. Western Australia has for too long been the cinderella State when it comes to organ donation. It is time that strong action was taken to enhance the level of organ and tissue donation in this State. Not only does the successful donation of organs and tissues change the quality of life for many people who are the beneficiaries, the recipients of those donations, but also in many cases it saves human lives. People are dying in Western Australia because of the shortage of donors for various tissues and organs. Three very important initiatives have been undertaken in this area. First, members will be aware that the notice paper contains amendments to the Coroners Act that are designed to broaden the range of people from whom donations can be received to include those people who have died outside of a hospital. That will mean that things like heart valves and corneas are donated at a greater rate - we hope the effect of the legislation will be that those sorts of tissues are donated at a greater rate than is currently the case. Secondly, we have appointed a medical donor coordinator at the Sir Charles Gairdner Hospital. I am told that that hospital is in a very poor state with organ donation. It had amongst the lowest rates and is a hospital that one would have expected to be amongst the highest. I am delighted to have recently approved the appointment of Dr Harry Moody as the medical donor coordinator at the Sir Charles Gairdner Hospital. He will be responsible each day for liaising with people in the emergency department, in the intensive care area and with families to dramatically increase the incidence of organ donation through that hospital by administrative action rather than necessarily any change in the law. If the program is successful there, where it is being trialled, we will seek to have it extended to other major hospitals in Western Australia. I am told by people who have made a study of this matter, including my good friend the member for Southern River, that in this area what has occurred in Spain is a model for the rest of the world; that is, if this procedure is driven administratively in the hospitals, the extent of organ donation is maximised. I am pleased that Dr Moody has taken up that post and I am hopeful that we will be able to report later in the year on a significant increase in the rate of organ donation. Mr M.F. Board: I think they are excellent moves. Have you considered the opt-out rather than the opt-in option? Mr J.A. McGINTY: I am coming to that. The third initiative is one that was discussed with my good friend Tony Abbott at the recent health ministers’ meeting. Mr M.F. Board: At the love-in. Mr J.A. McGINTY: The member does not like that. A resolution, which I helped draft at that meeting and which had the strong support of Minister Abbott, recognised that Australia had appallingly low rates of organ donation and that a range of initiatives, including, if need be, changes to the legislation governing organ and tissue donation, should be reviewed. We have undertaken a review of the state legislation and, interestingly, because I was not personally aware of this, the existing legislation provides that if the person making the donation, the deceased, had during his or her life made a clear expression of a desire to become a donor, such as signing a drivers licence application form or something of that nature, that should be honoured and there is no legal impediment to that being given full effect. However, if somebody had not become an organ donor or was not on the register of organ donors, the consent of the next of kin was necessary. Unfortunately, the practice in Western Australia does not accord with the statutory provision. The families are given a right of veto and approval is requested for somebody who had during his or her lifetime indicated that he or she wished to become an organ donor. The resolution carried by the health ministers some two or three weeks ago was to the effect that we should review the legislation to ensure that the wishes of the person, when alive, to become an organ donor should, to the maximum extent possible, be unfettered. Clearly, if a family has a vehement objection, no clinician will remove organs in the face of that objection. However, there are many administrative ways in which this matter can be addressed with greater effect, and by “effect” I mean be able to obtain those organs. As a result, we will be reviewing the protocols that exist in the hospital to give effect to the wording of the legislation, which is currently, in my view, not in need of amendment. I am hopeful that by the end of this year we will be able to report on a significant improvement in this life-saving area.
Three very important initiatives have been undertaken in this area. First, members will be aware that the notice paper contains amendments to the Coroners Act that are designed to broaden the range of people from whom donations can be received to include those people who have died outside of a hospital. That will mean that things like heart valves and corneas are donated at a greater rate - we hope the effect of the legislation will be that those sorts of tissues are donated at a greater rate than is currently the case. Secondly, we have appointed a medical donor coordinator at the Sir Charles Gairdner Hospital. I am told that that hospital is in a very poor state with organ donation. It had amongst the lowest rates and is a hospital that one would have expected to be amongst the highest. I am delighted to have recently approved the appointment of Dr Harry Moody as the medical donor coordinator at the Sir Charles Gairdner Hospital. He will be responsible each day for liaising with people in the emergency department, in the intensive care area and with families to dramatically increase the incidence of organ donation through that hospital by administrative action rather than necessarily any change in the law. If the program is successful there, where it is being trialled, we will seek to have it extended to other major hospitals in Western Australia. I am told by people who have made a study of this matter, including my good friend the member for Southern River, that in this area what has occurred in Spain is a model for the rest of the world; that is, if this procedure is driven administratively in the hospitals, the extent of organ donation is maximised. I am pleased that Dr Moody has taken up that post and I am hopeful that we will be able to report later in the year on a significant increase in the rate of organ donation. Mr M.F. Board: I think they are excellent moves. Have you considered the opt-out rather than the opt-in option? Mr J.A. McGINTY: I am coming to that. The third initiative is one that was discussed with my good friend Tony Abbott at the recent health ministers’ meeting. Mr M.F. Board: At the love-in. Mr J.A. McGINTY: The member does not like that. A resolution, which I helped draft at that meeting and which had the strong support of Minister Abbott, recognised that Australia had appallingly low rates of organ donation and that a range of initiatives, including, if need be, changes to the legislation governing organ and tissue donation, should be reviewed. We have undertaken a review of the state legislation and, interestingly, because I was not personally aware of this, the existing legislation provides that if the person making the donation, the deceased, had during his or her life made a clear expression of a desire to become a donor, such as signing a drivers licence application form or something of that nature, that should be honoured and there is no legal impediment to that being given full effect. However, if somebody had not become an organ donor or was not on the register of organ donors, the consent of the next of kin was necessary. Unfortunately, the practice in Western Australia does not accord with the statutory provision. The families are given a right of veto and approval is requested for somebody who had during his or her lifetime indicated that he or she wished to become an organ donor. The resolution carried by the health ministers some two or three weeks ago was to the effect that we should review the legislation to ensure that the wishes of the person, when alive, to become an organ donor should, to the maximum extent possible, be unfettered. Clearly, if a family has a vehement objection, no clinician will remove organs in the face of that objection. However, there are many administrative ways in which this matter can be addressed with greater effect, and by “effect” I mean be able to obtain those organs. As a result, we will be reviewing the protocols that exist in the hospital to give effect to the wording of the legislation, which is currently, in my view, not in need of amendment. I am hopeful that by the end of this year we will be able to report on a significant improvement in this life-saving area.
Mr M.F. Board: I think they are excellent moves. Have you considered the opt-out rather than the opt-in option? Mr J.A. McGINTY: I am coming to that. The third initiative is one that was discussed with my good friend Tony Abbott at the recent health ministers’ meeting. Mr M.F. Board: At the love-in. Mr J.A. McGINTY: The member does not like that. A resolution, which I helped draft at that meeting and which had the strong support of Minister Abbott, recognised that Australia had appallingly low rates of organ donation and that a range of initiatives, including, if need be, changes to the legislation governing organ and tissue donation, should be reviewed. We have undertaken a review of the state legislation and, interestingly, because I was not personally aware of this, the existing legislation provides that if the person making the donation, the deceased, had during his or her life made a clear expression of a desire to become a donor, such as signing a drivers licence application form or something of that nature, that should be honoured and there is no legal impediment to that being given full effect. However, if somebody had not become an organ donor or was not on the register of organ donors, the consent of the next of kin was necessary. Unfortunately, the practice in Western Australia does not accord with the statutory provision. The families are given a right of veto and approval is requested for somebody who had during his or her lifetime indicated that he or she wished to become an organ donor. The resolution carried by the health ministers some two or three weeks ago was to the effect that we should review the legislation to ensure that the wishes of the person, when alive, to become an organ donor should, to the maximum extent possible, be unfettered. Clearly, if a family has a vehement objection, no clinician will remove organs in the face of that objection. However, there are many administrative ways in which this matter can be addressed with greater effect, and by “effect” I mean be able to obtain those organs. As a result, we will be reviewing the protocols that exist in the hospital to give effect to the wording of the legislation, which is currently, in my view, not in need of amendment. I am hopeful that by the end of this year we will be able to report on a significant improvement in this life-saving area.
Mr J.A. McGINTY: I am coming to that. The third initiative is one that was discussed with my good friend Tony Abbott at the recent health ministers’ meeting. Mr M.F. Board: At the love-in. Mr J.A. McGINTY: The member does not like that. A resolution, which I helped draft at that meeting and which had the strong support of Minister Abbott, recognised that Australia had appallingly low rates of organ donation and that a range of initiatives, including, if need be, changes to the legislation governing organ and tissue donation, should be reviewed. We have undertaken a review of the state legislation and, interestingly, because I was not personally aware of this, the existing legislation provides that if the person making the donation, the deceased, had during his or her life made a clear expression of a desire to become a donor, such as signing a drivers licence application form or something of that nature, that should be honoured and there is no legal impediment to that being given full effect. However, if somebody had not become an organ donor or was not on the register of organ donors, the consent of the next of kin was necessary. Unfortunately, the practice in Western Australia does not accord with the statutory provision. The families are given a right of veto and approval is requested for somebody who had during his or her lifetime indicated that he or she wished to become an organ donor. The resolution carried by the health ministers some two or three weeks ago was to the effect that we should review the legislation to ensure that the wishes of the person, when alive, to become an organ donor should, to the maximum extent possible, be unfettered. Clearly, if a family has a vehement objection, no clinician will remove organs in the face of that objection. However, there are many administrative ways in which this matter can be addressed with greater effect, and by “effect” I mean be able to obtain those organs. As a result, we will be reviewing the protocols that exist in the hospital to give effect to the wording of the legislation, which is currently, in my view, not in need of amendment. I am hopeful that by the end of this year we will be able to report on a significant improvement in this life-saving area.
Mr M.F. Board: At the love-in. Mr J.A. McGINTY: The member does not like that. A resolution, which I helped draft at that meeting and which had the strong support of Minister Abbott, recognised that Australia had appallingly low rates of organ donation and that a range of initiatives, including, if need be, changes to the legislation governing organ and tissue donation, should be reviewed. We have undertaken a review of the state legislation and, interestingly, because I was not personally aware of this, the existing legislation provides that if the person making the donation, the deceased, had during his or her life made a clear expression of a desire to become a donor, such as signing a drivers licence application form or something of that nature, that should be honoured and there is no legal impediment to that being given full effect. However, if somebody had not become an organ donor or was not on the register of organ donors, the consent of the next of kin was necessary. Unfortunately, the practice in Western Australia does not accord with the statutory provision. The families are given a right of veto and approval is requested for somebody who had during his or her lifetime indicated that he or she wished to become an organ donor. The resolution carried by the health ministers some two or three weeks ago was to the effect that we should review the legislation to ensure that the wishes of the person, when alive, to become an organ donor should, to the maximum extent possible, be unfettered. Clearly, if a family has a vehement objection, no clinician will remove organs in the face of that objection. However, there are many administrative ways in which this matter can be addressed with greater effect, and by “effect” I mean be able to obtain those organs. As a result, we will be reviewing the protocols that exist in the hospital to give effect to the wording of the legislation, which is currently, in my view, not in need of amendment. I am hopeful that by the end of this year we will be able to report on a significant improvement in this life-saving area.
Mr J.A. McGINTY: The member does not like that. A resolution, which I helped draft at that meeting and which had the strong support of Minister Abbott, recognised that Australia had appallingly low rates of organ donation and that a range of initiatives, including, if need be, changes to the legislation governing organ and tissue donation, should be reviewed. We have undertaken a review of the state legislation and, interestingly, because I was not personally aware of this, the existing legislation provides that if the person making the donation, the deceased, had during his or her life made a clear expression of a desire to become a donor, such as signing a drivers licence application form or something of that nature, that should be honoured and there is no legal impediment to that being given full effect. However, if somebody had not become an organ donor or was not on the register of organ donors, the consent of the next of kin was necessary. Unfortunately, the practice in Western Australia does not accord with the statutory provision. The families are given a right of veto and approval is requested for somebody who had during his or her lifetime indicated that he or she wished to become an organ donor. The resolution carried by the health ministers some two or three weeks ago was to the effect that we should review the legislation to ensure that the wishes of the person, when alive, to become an organ donor should, to the maximum extent possible, be unfettered. Clearly, if a family has a vehement objection, no clinician will remove organs in the face of that objection. However, there are many administrative ways in which this matter can be addressed with greater effect, and by “effect” I mean be able to obtain those organs. As a result, we will be reviewing the protocols that exist in the hospital to give effect to the wording of the legislation, which is currently, in my view, not in need of amendment. I am hopeful that by the end of this year we will be able to report on a significant improvement in this life-saving area.
Explore WA Government Data
Search the full archive in the free dashboard, or query programmatically via API.
Explore more
Government Gazette
Appointments, regulatory notices, planning changes.
Hansard
Debates, questions, speeches and sentiment.
Tabled Papers
Reports and documents tabled in Parliament.
Committees
Committee profiles and recent reports.
Regulations
Subsidiary legislation with filters and summaries.
Bills
Proposed laws and parliamentary progress.
Acts
Current WA legislation and summaries.
Explanatory Memoranda
Bills with EMs (text/PDF) available.
Members
MP profiles, party breakdown and rankings.
Pollie Rankings
Data-driven rankings across 19 categories.
Amendment Chains
Track how schemes and regulations evolve over time.