onsdag, september 20, 2006

Politisk innflytelse - Synlighet


Med et bilde av Transplanterte og pårørende som gjør seg klar til Stavgang på Sundvollen sist helg, og spesifikt med en av frontfigurene (Terje Aarsland nummer 2 fra venstre mellom Frank og Knut) i den store media fokusen vi hadde om Organdonasjon tidlig i sommer, deler vi her med dere vår respons på EU-Notatet (våre svar i blått på engelsk) som vi nevnte på møtet.

På slutten av blogposten nevner vi andre linker i samme anledning:

Consultation document on Organ Donation and Transplantation
Response Form

1. This document describes the situation at European level in the area of organ transplantation, identifying the main problems. Are all the basic problems identified? Are the problems identified correctly described?
( max 750 words)
This document describes in our opinion the situation concerning organ donation and transplantation at the European level in a brief, but fairly accurate way and identifies the basic problems involved.


2. The document also describes a number of actions oriented to tackle the main problems. Is there any other initiative that you consider useful?
( max 750 words)
It seems that the proposed actions cover most of the problem areas.
A coordinated EU-action towards the many challenges facing organ donation and transplantation in Europe is most welcome. The volume of proposed actions are quite impressive and to a great extent in line with recommendations made by the Committee of Experts (CP-CTO) of the Council of Europe.

We should like to underline the great opportunities that use of live donors for kidney transplants can do to help reducing waiting lists in many European countries. Norway was among the pioneers in the field of live donors and has gathered great experience. To-day live donors represent some 40% of all kidney transplants in our country. This is a safe and very successful program that more countries should be encouraged to introduce.

3. The shortage of organ donors is being described as the main problem in the field. Do you think that EU action would have an added value? Do you think that the initiatives described in the document in this direction are sufficient? Are there any other actions that should be promoted at EU level?
( max 750 words)
No doubt, the shortage of organ donors is the most important problem to be tackled. We believe that over time the proposed actions should have a positive effect on organ donation in Europe, in particular in the new member states.

Short term, the most effective method to increase organ donation are in our opinion to establish well organised and trained teams in all donor hospital that is able to detect all potential donors and who also have the ability to tackle the difficult task of obtaining family approval for donation (The Spanish model).

Co-operation among countries like for instant in Eurotransplant and Scandiatransplant should be encouraged, but we do not believe that the creation of a “Europool” would be an alternative.

Raising donor awareness among the general public is also of great importance. Instead of introducing a special European organ donor card (in addition to so many other such cards in circulation) we propose that this should be incorporated in the existing “European Health Card” as soon as this has been developed in to a full-fledged electronic health card for all EU-citizens. Such a card will be held by ALL and will have a much greater legitimacy.
Furthermore we propose to establish a “European Donor Day” on a fixed day every year that should be used by all member countries to promote organ donation. (This has already proposed by the Council of Europe’s Committee of Experts (SP-CTO)).

4. Accessibility to transplants varies widely in the EU. Do you think that the Commission should foster the coordination between Member States to improve the situation? Do you think that the initiatives described in the document in this direction are correct? Are there any other actions that should be promoted at EU level?
( max 750 words)
We are not quite sure if we understand what is meant by accessibility in this connection. Among the proposed actions is mentioned “Exchange of patients….. common transplant lists etc.” If the intentions are that patients resident in EU-countries with low accessibility to transplantation under certain conditions should be entitled to transplantation in other EU-countries with a better accessibility, we believe that this would be a very sensitive issue.
However if by accessibility is meant cooperation between various countries like that we understand has been developed between Austria and Hungary, where apparently certain types of organ transplantation are being performed in Austria for patients from Hungary but with organs from Hungary, this is of course a method of cooperation that should be encouraged.

5 The document presents the following three options for future EU policy on organ transplantation.
(1) Use of existing programmes only
(2) Active coordination between Member States on organ quality, safety and availability
(3) Minimum harmonisation on quality & safety, plus EU initiative on organ trafficking

Which one of these options do you consider the most appropriate? Would you wish to modify / add / remove some of the contents included in the option? Please explain your reasons

( max 750 words)
It is somewhat difficult to evaluate the practical outcome of the various alternative proposed, but believe that we would recommend Alt. 3.

Andre linker:

LNT´s høringsuttalelse
RuneE´s blog om Ny Organdonasjonslov i UK
og en link til HOD om saken.

Det hører med at FHLT/LHL svarte innen fristen og har mottatt Takk fra EU.

Comments:
Son kommentar til Loven i UK har vi fått følgende svar fra Stiftelsen:

Jeg så ditt innlegg vedr. UK.

Gjør oppmerksom på at det er helt likt her. Se rundskriv 1-9/2003 fra Helse- og omsorgsdepartementet. Har dessverre ikke tid til å diskutere mer nå, men kommer gjerne sterkere tilbake etter donasjonsdagen 14. oktober.

Med vennlig hilsen
Stiftelsen Organdonasjon
Hege Lundin Kuhle
daglig leder

Adr.: Postboks 4375 Nydalen, 0402 Oslo
Tlf. 22799292, mob. 91635769
www.organdonasjon.no
 
Det er vel også på sin plass å takke Audun Bell for hans bidrag med å lage høringsuttalelsen
 
Det var veldig bra at FHLT/LHL fikk sagt sitt i denne saken. Jeg har imidlertid et ørlite spørsmål:

Under spørsmål 5 går LNT inn for aktiv koordinering av kvalitet og trygghet mens FHLT/LHL går inn for en minimumsløsning på dette punktet. Jeg kan godt forstå at dette er vanskelig å konkretisere, men jeg skulle svært gjerne sett en nærmere begrunnelse for dette valget.
 
Legg inn en kommentar

Links to this post:

Opprett en link



<< Home

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?