Should it be compulsory for everyone who can to give blood?

Question

Blood is incredibly important. One day, you or a loved one might need a transfusion.

So, should it be compulsory for everyone who can to give blood?

Answer 1

Very good & interesting question.... Worthy of a star!!!

Either way one goes about answering this - one is preaty much "damn if you do and damn if you don't"..

...

Blood is extremely needed at hospitals everywhere and if these supplies starting going dry – It’s a huge concerned for those in that area or city. Everyone should give if they can and an excuse of being afraid of a needle – well – very childish. For those that use such as excuse – If you would? Look to those to whom you love the most in your lives and picture them in a hospital – Either sick, automobile accident, deceased laden, most anything one can possibility think of that would require surgery.
Your local hospital out of blood and this is required to perform this surgery. Now.... Ask yourself – again the same question above. You might feel somewhat different if the person needing this is a close family member.
My suggestion would be for all to give blood – All healthy people that can “SHOULD”...
If the local hospitals do experience problems of this in an emergency of needing blood desperately – YES. It should be compulsory!!!
Especially if in an emergency situation and many individuals are in need of this vital substance.
I’m 51, married for 29 years, son of 25. If I had to give too my last drop to either of them.... I would not hastate.

Answer 2

Your sentiment is understood but I think the compulsory taking of blood would be regarded as an invasion of civil and personal liberty. After all, it's a part of the very reason why you stand up and exist. Perhaps as a compromise, everybody should be on a register with their blood type and contact details. That way, people could offer blood by agreement when contacted in emergencies but of course there would be a lot of declining so a blood store is still the only way. Perhaps the best way to promote more donors is by more advertising, doctors, nurses, clinics, pharmacies .... all places where people could be actively promoted to be a donor.

Answer 3

I am gonna go with no. What is somebody has a phobia of needles. Plus giving blood isn't exactly desirable. Also, if it was mandatory.. all you have to do is get a tatoo and you can't donate for a year. I think a lot of people would be getting tattoos once a year. Sometimes people have conditions that they are yet unaware of. If they donate blood it would be bad for their health.

Answer 4

that's reccomendable to do it, because of the fact HIV has no treatment, yet prevention basically. as properly HIV+ means virus provider, yet not precisely lively ailment. HIV could have an prolonged incubation era, so people who did not comprehend that they carried it may flow it to different persons. subject Nº a million is that the virus assaults immune device while it motives lively ailment AIDS, and it motives immunosupression. HIV+ human beings could confirm their CD4 white blood cellular count style and the viral load, to se in the event that they're greater companies to oportunistic ailments.

Answer 5

Nope some people can't give blood for health reasons like low iron and diabetes. I am one of them. My husband gives blood alright but I can't. It is not a choice.

Answer 6

Then everyone would have to donate to charity, or give bone marrow or whatever. It is absolutly a great thing to do and the right thing to do, but it is a choice you make, and thats what it should be.

Answer 7

No, because the next step is to make organ donation compulsory.

Answer 8

No, giving blood and donating organs should both be a choice.

Answer 9

compulsory. no way. i have the upmost respect for people who do. but why put some people through something like that if theyre afraid of needles.

Answer 10

Yeah it should. Besides the fact that I'm petrified of needles, it should be compulsory.