The recent publicity attendant on Dr Garlic's liver transplant seems to have achieved the exact opposite effect. The stark reality has dawned that, once you donate the organs, you have no control over whom is chosen as the recipient. Dr Garlic today, Dr Death tomorrow, perhaps even Barend Strydom next.
It seems mean to deny the potential of a better life - or perhaps just a longer one - to someone who could benefit from donated organs. But if that person goes on to kill others - directly, as in the case of Strydom, or through dubious policies, as in the Dr Garlic case, would more deaths have been prevented by withholding the organs?
It raises difficult ethical questions, but I'm hanging onto my organs now, just in case.