title: Opt-out and consent.
abstract: A chief objection to opt-out organ donor registration policies is that they do not secure people's actual consent to donation, and so fail to respect their autonomy rights to decide what happens to their organs after they die. However, scholars have recently offered two powerful responses to this objection. First, Michael B Gill argues that opt-out policies do not fail to respect people's autonomy simply because they do not secure people's actual consent to donation. Second, Ben Saunders argues that opt-out policies do secure people's actual-if not explicit-consent, provided that certain conditions are satisfied. I argue that Gill and Saunders' arguments are not successful. My conclusion does not imply that jurisdictions should not implement opt-out policies-their failure to secure people's actual consent may be outweighed by other considerations. But, my conclusion does imply that Gill and Saunders are mistaken to claim that opt-out policies are respectful of people's autonomy.
authors.forename: Douglas
authors.initials: D
authors.lastname: MacKay
mesh_terms: D002755:Choice Behavior; D006801:Humans; D019724:Presumed Consent / Q000941:ethics*; D014019:Tissue Donors; D020858:Tissue and Organ Harvesting / Q000941:ethics*; D009927:Tissue and Organ Procurement / Q000941:ethics*
keywords: Autonomy; Donation/Procurement of Organs/Tissues; Informed Consent; Public Policy; Rights