Other comment on consultation (Q4)
Question 4: If you would like to comment on any other aspect of this consultation, please comment here.
70. The final question provided respondents the opportunity to submit more general or wide-ranging responses to the consultation paper. 13 respondents (six individual and seven organisation) submitted a response to this question.
71. Two respondents (one organisation and one individual) responded only to state 'nil to add'. The remaining 11 respondents generally used this question to summarise points made in response to previous questions or to reflect more widely on the implementation of the 2019 Act.
72. A number of organisational and individual respondents suggested that the approach set out by the 2019 Act, which requires that pre-death procedures are specified in regulation, is overly prescriptive and may be impractical in the long term and could be unlikely to work in practice.
73. Related to this, some respondents commented that any list must be as comprehensive as possible to avoid procedures that may be required for a potential donor being unavailable. In relation to the duty to inquire about a potential donor's views about pre-death procedures, two respondents noted that this could be potentially burdensome on families and could impact on the length of the donation process which in turn could affect the willingness of families to support the process.
74. Some respondents did state their support for the prescribed list of pre-death procedures or to note that, in principle, setting out a specified list could be helpful and provide clarity for the clinical community.
75. Other respondents commented more widely on the future operation of a deemed authorisation (opt-out) system in Scotland, and the importance of public information in order for such a system to function effectively. In relation to pre-death procedures, one clinical respondent highlighted the importance of awareness raising making clear that pre-death procedures are not new and are established medical procedures.
76. Related to awareness raising, one respondent, on behalf of a representative faith organisation, stated their support for and made a request that the Scottish Government include, within the public facing organ donor register for Scottish residents, an option for a person to indicate that their faith is important to them. The respondent put forward that this option to record a faith consideration as part of registration for deceased donation would provide further reassurance for members of a faith group that their faith and beliefs would be taken fully into account.
77. Some respondents expressed concern that a draft Type B pre-death procedure list has not yet been consulted upon and noted that it may be difficult to provide views on Type A in isolation. One respondent observed that progression of the Type B list separately might mean that procedures that are more appropriately classified as Type B, are suggested for inclusion on the Type A list. However others noted that the timescales for Type B regulations must not affect what is present on the Type A list. One organisational respondent cautioned that not having a Type B procedure list implemented at the same time as the Type A list could result in lost donor potential.