I have written two blogs on UNOS. 1) addressing their failure to increase the number of organ donors so that it matches the need for organs and 2) their failure to properly communicate the need and to focus their communications.
I should point out that my only goal is to save lives. I work for no organization, company or group that would benefit monetarily or otherwise from anything I say. The only benefit I want is to increase the number of donors. If my thoughts and suggestions are offensive to some, I appologize, but I fail to see how ideas can be offensive when posed in the light of the current organ deficiency crisis. Any idea should be well considered before it is rejected.
UNOS, however, seems to find my quest to increase organ donors as offensive and somehow disloyal. And —in response to what I have written, offer nothing but lame excuses as refutation. They seem to think that because they used to be one of my clients (mid 90’s) I should not be writing blogs that are critical of them. Well, they are not a client now, nor have they been for almost a decade (I don’t suppose they will be anytime soon either). They are not paying me anymore and I certainly owe them no more loyalty than they owe me.
We both want the same thing, “to stop the dying.” The difference is that UNOS is satisfied with the status quo, which is the growing gap between the number of available organs and the number of people who need them. They have advocated the same altuistic program since their first government contract 22 years ago and have ignored the fact that it simply doesn’t work. I, on the other hand, only want to see them show some real concern for the “listed” patients and at least try something new even if it is only a small trial in one small region. Or –how about taking a new position that may need congressional approval and fighting for it. I don’t hear UNOS fighting for anything except, perhaps, their next contract.
Please take the time to again read my Blog, “UNOS — A Failure at Increasing Organ Donantion.” There are several comments on that blog but I would like you to read Joel Newman’s (UNOS communication department) comments and my response. Then I’d like to hear your thoughts. I have seen nothing in Mr. Newman’s comments that even hints at doing something new. What I see is a defense of a broken systm and that they are very busy.
I think we all agree that increasing organ donation is not only necessary it is critical because we are in a crisis where there’s no end in sight for the dying. I think we can also agree that if you are not part of the solution you are part of the problem. Right now UNOS respresents the problem and they must begin to seriously consider the many solutions offered by scores of thoughtful well-meaning people. Either that or we will just watch the body count rise.