Slaves of the state

The proposal by the Chief Medical Officer Sir Liam Donaldson to introduce an opt-out system for organ donation in preference to the current opt-in system addresses a real problem. There are currently too few organs available for the current demand for transplants. The suggestion is that everyone should be presumed to have given consent to their organs being used in transplantation unless they have explicitly withdrawn that consent. This would then, theoretically, result in a much larger potential pool of organs available for donation.

This suggestion appears to enjoy a fair degree of popular support. A poll on the BBC website showed about sixty percent in favour of such a scheme, and anyone who knows anyone who has benefited from an organ transplant will no doubt feel bound to support any system which might be of similar help to others.

Remarkably little attention has been given, however, to the fundamental change which such a proposal presents. The implication is that each of our bodies is, in principle, owned by the state - or at least that the state has the right to harvest whatever organs it sees fit after death unless an individual goes to the lengths of formally withholding consent for this to be done.

It is entirely possible that many supporters of Sir Liam Donaldson's proposal are aware of the issues involved and consider that the benefit in saved lives outweighs the disadvantage of the effective transfer of power between the individual and the state - and there may even be some justice in this view. However, this is not a step which should be taken lightly.

The government's proposals for identity cards is also relevant here. It is suggested that a citizen's identity card might be revocable by the Home Secretary: in other words, it would be within the powers of the Home Secretary to withdraw a person's citizenship, which would in practice be enough to paralyse an individual within society (it is envisaged that even simple bank transactions might require a customer to present an identity card). What we are faced with here is a transformation of the relationship between individual and state. We are moving to a position where the concept of the state as a community of free citizens is being replaced by a state as controller - owner - of citizens who are no longer free but entirely dependent on the whim of state power.

In a free society, citizens are assumed to be masters of their own destiny. In the society being built around us, citizens are becoming the slaves of an over-mighty executive with its own agenda. This is worth considering when entertaining superficially attractive ideas which in fact undermine the very fabric of freedom.