To save more lives, a government proposes a law where everyone is an organ donor unless they actively opt-out, using presumed consent. Is this a compassionate policy that maximizes the common good, or an unethical violation of personal choice over one's body?

Why this dilemma matters

Society dilemmas ask whose costs and whose voices count when no one wins everything. Choosing “Support the opt-out system, prioritizing the urgent need for organs and the potential to save countless lives” prioritises long-term system health; choosing “Reject the opt-out system, upholding the principle of explicit, informed consent as a fundamental right that cannot be presumed” gives more weight to short-term relief for some.

Worth asking yourself

• Are we solving the problem or moving it?
• What does this say about what we collectively value?