0:00:03 > 0:00:06Today on The Big Questions...
0:00:06 > 0:00:08Social media.
0:00:08 > 0:00:10Can you have the good without the bad?
0:00:10 > 0:00:12And Max's Law.
0:00:12 > 0:00:19Should you have to opt out of being on the organ donor register?
0:00:25 > 0:00:30APPLAUSE
0:00:30 > 0:00:32Good morning, I'm Nicky Campbell, welcome to The Big Questions.
0:00:32 > 0:00:34Today, we're live from Bath Spa University.
0:00:34 > 0:00:36Welcome, everybody, to The Big Questions.
0:00:36 > 0:00:43APPLAUSE
0:00:43 > 0:00:45Social media.
0:00:45 > 0:00:48The online world of Twitter, FaceBook, Snapchat and many other
0:00:48 > 0:00:52sites, where ideas and comments can be posted and pictures shared,
0:00:52 > 0:00:58is probably the biggest change to have affected our daily lives
0:00:58 > 0:01:00since the advent of television or the mobile phone.
0:01:00 > 0:01:02People across the globe can share what is happening to them
0:01:02 > 0:01:04with friends and complete strangers in an instant.
0:01:04 > 0:01:06Politicians, businesses, entertainers, artists and conmen
0:01:06 > 0:01:08all have an easy way to peddle their ideas
0:01:08 > 0:01:14and wares direct to you, 24 hours a day, wherever you are.
0:01:14 > 0:01:17The snag is there is no editorial control, there are no real systems
0:01:17 > 0:01:23to filter out the fake news or the scams.
0:01:23 > 0:01:26Indeed, fake news is often used to direct the unwary
0:01:26 > 0:01:27viewer to the scams.
0:01:27 > 0:01:29And while it can bring people closer together,
0:01:29 > 0:01:32it can also be highly divisive, pitting groups against each other
0:01:32 > 0:01:34and unleashing storms of abuse on hapless individuals.
0:01:34 > 0:01:42Is social media beyond control?
0:01:43 > 0:01:49Laura, welcome to The Big Questions, PhD researcher in social media. Out
0:01:49 > 0:01:54of control, isn't that the point, the wonderful thing about social
0:01:54 > 0:01:58media?I am with you, social media is a wonderful thing, but it has got
0:01:58 > 0:02:03to the point where it is well beyond control. In the last general
0:02:03 > 0:02:09election, we were exposed the amount of abuse social media can it bring,
0:02:09 > 0:02:16MPs spoke about the amount of abuse they experienced, and that exposed
0:02:16 > 0:02:21that actually social media can be a threat to democracy. I have had the
0:02:21 > 0:02:24pleasure of interviewing politicians and candidates and I remember a
0:02:24 > 0:02:28candidate speaking to me openly about the abuse she received and she
0:02:28 > 0:02:33turned around and said, if I had children, I would not put myself in
0:02:33 > 0:02:38this position, and that is a threat to our democracy, we are segregating
0:02:38 > 0:02:43certain people from going forward in our political system.Our question,
0:02:43 > 0:02:51is it beyond control,
0:02:52 > 0:02:53is it beyond control, can it be controlled, should it be controlled?
0:02:53 > 0:02:55The other side, a great force for democratisation, it has given people
0:02:55 > 0:02:58a voice, a fantastic thing, don't we have to accept it, uncomfortable as
0:02:58 > 0:03:04it is, because of the good?It does bring good and campaigns have been
0:03:04 > 0:03:12won solely online, The Everyday Sexism Project, brilliant, but there
0:03:12 > 0:03:18has to be restrictions. I am all for freedom of expression. But that is
0:03:18 > 0:03:23not absolute.The establishment is rattled. It has rattled their cage.
0:03:23 > 0:03:28If you start talking about restrictions, we smell a rat. Does
0:03:28 > 0:03:38everybody smell a rat? OK. Let us not move onto the next debate quite
0:03:38 > 0:03:43yet.Ben? A threat to democracy, but there is a real problem here which
0:03:43 > 0:03:48is a case in India last July, seven guys beaten to death by a mob
0:03:48 > 0:03:53because of a fake story on WhatsApp, that they were a child abductors.
0:03:53 > 0:03:58Same thing happened in the US, the story Hillary Clinton was running a
0:03:58 > 0:04:06paedophile ring from the basement of a pizzeria. An American guy went in
0:04:06 > 0:04:11with an assault rifle and started firing. What happens online does not
0:04:11 > 0:04:17stay online and it can have real life and real death consequences.Is
0:04:17 > 0:04:22it a new thing, and amplified thing now of that there is no doubt? But
0:04:22 > 0:04:26what about online abuse, Emily? People who do not want to go into
0:04:26 > 0:04:31politics because of vile stuff they are receiving something has to be
0:04:31 > 0:04:37done?Nothing has to be done. People use social media for good, the
0:04:37 > 0:04:41overwhelming majority. As is the case in public life, there is a flip
0:04:41 > 0:04:45side, there will always be people who are nasty and abusive, but I
0:04:45 > 0:04:51would say no
0:04:51 > 0:04:54would say no regulation, any regulation who was the person who
0:04:54 > 0:04:59decides what is the truth, the line of what people can and cannot say?
0:04:59 > 0:05:05That worries me, deeply concerning, that there will be gatekeepers and
0:05:05 > 0:05:10the right opinion. People get abused, deeply unpleasant. But it is
0:05:10 > 0:05:16a small drop in the massive ocean of good social media does in connecting
0:05:16 > 0:05:20people.Obviously, abuse happens on the street, but if you look at the
0:05:20 > 0:05:24type of abuse going on on social media, I would argue very little of
0:05:24 > 0:05:30that happens on the street. Could you imagine, for example, Jess
0:05:30 > 0:05:34Phillips, an MP in Birmingham, she spoke out about receiving 600
0:05:34 > 0:05:38threats of rape in one night alone on Twitter. Could you imagine
0:05:38 > 0:05:42someone in the street stood there well someone screamed threats of
0:05:42 > 0:05:49rape at you?Death threats as well. Have you had any?I have. I ran a
0:05:49 > 0:05:54press freedom campaign and I received thousands in the night.
0:05:54 > 0:05:59Death threats? Death threats, rape, misogynistic abuse. The difference
0:05:59 > 0:06:03between that and on the street, for example, I could turn off Twitter
0:06:03 > 0:06:09and it was quite a powerful feeling, thinking that, actually, this stuff
0:06:09 > 0:06:14is really unpleasant and no one is saying it is nice. I turned it off,
0:06:14 > 0:06:18my phone, and it stopped.Because of the dominance of social media, you
0:06:18 > 0:06:24are saying, the best way to overcome abuse is switching it off, well, is
0:06:24 > 0:06:29that actually controlling it, switching it off? If we look at the
0:06:29 > 0:06:37last general election, social media dominated. Fair MPs, they campaigned
0:06:37 > 0:06:41quite -- for MPs, they campaigned a lot on social media. If you said,
0:06:41 > 0:06:44you do not want to receive the threats online, switch off social
0:06:44 > 0:06:49media, would that MPs be in Parliament now?That is not the only
0:06:49 > 0:06:54option. If you are the victim of abuse, you do have ultimate control,
0:06:54 > 0:06:59you can turn it off, mute people, ignore them, it is not a tangible
0:06:59 > 0:07:04threat. It is not pleasant and no one reading through the tweets or
0:07:04 > 0:07:09messages is thinking, this is great fun, but you are in control, it is
0:07:09 > 0:07:15not a real threat to your life.To the audience, what would you like to
0:07:15 > 0:07:24say?We are assuming the mainstream media is not out of control. MSM.
0:07:24 > 0:07:30They are owned by the corrupt elite, brainwashing us for years.We have
0:07:30 > 0:07:35got regulators...Anything on mainstream news, we are saying it is
0:07:35 > 0:07:40real, I would much rather go to YouTube and look at Russell Brand to
0:07:40 > 0:07:44find out the truth behind something rather than immediately believing
0:07:44 > 0:07:50the newspaper. Taking some of the responsibility, like the lady said,
0:07:50 > 0:07:56the social media is about the people and taking control and learning to
0:07:56 > 0:07:59be... Learning how to recognise if something is real or fake, we should
0:07:59 > 0:08:05be teaching it in schools, and teaching about media, so that we can
0:08:05 > 0:08:10look at something, is that the truth?Russell, that is a good
0:08:10 > 0:08:16point, that is a load of baloney?I look at what he has come his
0:08:16 > 0:08:21history, background, belief systems, his intention.And it is your belief
0:08:21 > 0:08:26system?It might, but it might challenge mine.You and Russell are
0:08:26 > 0:08:31in a bubble.My views have changed massively since I was young and
0:08:31 > 0:08:36Socialist worker and now I am in my 40s, totally different beliefs, I
0:08:36 > 0:08:41have children, things change. I would love my children to be
0:08:41 > 0:08:45inquisitive, even when it comes to TV adverts, not much difference
0:08:45 > 0:08:50between TV adverts and Instagram. The mainstream media, people do not
0:08:50 > 0:08:54trust the mainstream media anymore, Ben?There is a conspiracy theory
0:08:54 > 0:09:00they are peddling the same story. Try to find the Telegraph and the
0:09:00 > 0:09:04Guardian agreeing on anything. They have hundreds of years of tradition
0:09:04 > 0:09:09and there is a system in place, fact checkers. A couple of times they
0:09:09 > 0:09:13have one stories I have done and it has taken time to get through
0:09:13 > 0:09:18because they are checking every link. There is a process. There is a
0:09:18 > 0:09:25fact checking process, correction process.This is dangerous.This is
0:09:25 > 0:09:34dangerous? Can I introduce you? Presenter of arty, used to be Russia
0:09:34 > 0:09:42Today, Afshin Rattansi.
0:09:42 > 0:09:45Today, Afshin Rattansi. -- presenter of RT. The reason there is fertile
0:09:45 > 0:09:48ground for the fake news is because the public have lost faith in the
0:09:48 > 0:09:57media. It is finished. That is why RT is doing well, maybe even Donald
0:09:57 > 0:10:02Trump is doing well. The reason why it is these publications, whether
0:10:02 > 0:10:09the Iraq war, Afghanistan war, Libyan war, issues of war and
0:10:09 > 0:10:15peace...Was it a problem with the BBC? The BBC just about got close
0:10:15 > 0:10:22down.They fired me, they fired the Director General. We could see we
0:10:22 > 0:10:30were being told by the Government to persuade the people into war. The
0:10:30 > 0:10:34Guardian, the Observer, they supported the same thing.
0:10:34 > 0:10:39Interesting, but on the point... A lot comes back to Russia, how much
0:10:39 > 0:10:46of a problem, a danger even, are RT? In terms of their viewing, very
0:10:46 > 0:10:54small, the figures, 0.4% at the time of being watched, in terms of the
0:10:54 > 0:10:56impact, there are orders of magnitude second and third and what
0:10:56 > 0:11:04we have seen as a full-scale attempt to undermine the mainstream media.
0:11:04 > 0:11:14And on... The public response to us. So does Ofcom.Ofcom has complained
0:11:14 > 0:11:20against the BBC for more than RT. When it gets down to media,
0:11:20 > 0:11:27partiality, overall, you are right, Ofcom have lots of... They deal with
0:11:27 > 0:11:30nudity, inappropriate language. Violations of journalistic
0:11:30 > 0:11:35standards, the observation further due accuracy and impartiality,
0:11:35 > 0:11:41#MeToo has had more programmes found guilty of violating those standards
0:11:41 > 0:11:47-- RT has had more programmes found guilty.I would say... I worked
0:11:47 > 0:11:54there. I have a TV show. No one has told me what to do.But your chief
0:11:54 > 0:11:59editor refers to RT as the information weapon. In an interview
0:11:59 > 0:12:04in 2012...It is a weapon for the poor and dispossessed. We interview
0:12:04 > 0:12:16the worker in the factory, not the CPO. It weapon
0:12:16 > 0:12:20CPO. It weapon the work adopted 2008, she said, we are fighting war
0:12:20 > 0:12:30against the entire Western world -- in an interview in 2008. I think
0:12:30 > 0:12:34those comments were taken completely out of...Let us take it back to
0:12:34 > 0:12:42social media, what are the Russians doing with bots and trolls. Bots our
0:12:42 > 0:12:45automated accounts. What we saw from Russia was an outfit called the
0:12:45 > 0:12:50internet research agency in St Petersburg won in 3500 patrol
0:12:50 > 0:12:54Twitter accounts, fake Facebook accounts, masquerading as Americans
0:12:54 > 0:13:01on both sides of the political divide, a lot of the content was
0:13:01 > 0:13:04pro-trump-macro, pro-guns, anti-migrant, white supremacist.A
0:13:04 > 0:13:11lot of the comment was black lives matter, saying white supremacists
0:13:11 > 0:13:14are evil, I would not necessarily disagree with that, but pushing both
0:13:14 > 0:13:20sides. In May, 2016, the troll factory in St Petersburg ordered two
0:13:20 > 0:13:25simultaneous rallies in Houston, one protesting against the opening of an
0:13:25 > 0:13:28Islamic cultural centre and one in favour.The Soviets used to do this,
0:13:28 > 0:13:34active measures. Propaganda. They spread the rumour that HIV was
0:13:34 > 0:13:38created by the CIA. They kicked off the stuff about the Kennedy
0:13:38 > 0:13:43conspiracy. What is the problem? The same as it ever was, the scale of
0:13:43 > 0:13:48it?The scale and the directness. There were cases from Robert
0:13:48 > 0:13:53Mueller's indictment, the troll factory is was interacting with real
0:13:53 > 0:13:57Americans through social media and organising campaign rallies, the
0:13:57 > 0:14:01troll factory paid people to turn up, dressed as Hillary Clinton in
0:14:01 > 0:14:05jail. You had direct contact between Russian agents in St Petersburg and
0:14:05 > 0:14:10Americans on the ground, not a case of collusion, people being fooled.
0:14:10 > 0:14:17This is dangerous. Will Moy.So interesting how much the world has
0:14:17 > 0:14:22changed since we started Full Fact. When we started, you could latest
0:14:22 > 0:14:30every outlet in the country, that day is over now. It means all of us
0:14:30 > 0:14:34can tell people what we think and what we know about the world, we can
0:14:34 > 0:14:38share those ideas, it is exciting, but it is much harder for all of us
0:14:38 > 0:14:41because things are coming to you from 1000 different places and you
0:14:41 > 0:14:46do not know the track record, you have to do more work to figure it
0:14:46 > 0:14:55out. The every link being fact checked, what Ben said, I'm sorry,
0:14:55 > 0:14:59that is not possible. Some are clinging onto enough money to do
0:14:59 > 0:15:05that, but most are publishing stuff too quickly to make that possible.
0:15:05 > 0:15:09That is what Full Fact does. We publish links to every review so
0:15:09 > 0:15:13that you can judge it for yourself and this is where we will have to
0:15:13 > 0:15:17end up. If you want someone to trust you, it will not be enough to say, I
0:15:17 > 0:15:22am so-and-so, take my word. It will have to be, I can show you where you
0:15:22 > 0:15:26got it from, you can judge it.Are people interested in checking it
0:15:26 > 0:15:32out? It is not critical thinking, it is wishful thinking. In a sense. You
0:15:32 > 0:15:42see stuff you want to think is true and you disregard the rest.
0:15:42 > 0:15:52We will all do that, of course. On the BBC, we get both sides of it.
0:15:52 > 0:15:57We have always tended to look for things we agree with, when we choose
0:15:57 > 0:16:03what newspaper to buy, we used to choose because we liked its views.
0:16:03 > 0:16:07I buy things I disagree with. But most of us are human, we look
0:16:07 > 0:16:13for things that we agree with. That is not a new challenge. We have to
0:16:13 > 0:16:19look on the Internet, it is about all of us having conversations with
0:16:19 > 0:16:26each other, but there are parts of it from a news point of view which
0:16:26 > 0:16:30aren't just all of us having conversations with ourselves. When
0:16:30 > 0:16:35it comes to people paying money in secret to target adverts to
0:16:35 > 0:16:41particular parts of the population, you don't know who, that is new and
0:16:41 > 0:16:44an exercise of power and it is reasonable to ask who is doing it
0:16:44 > 0:16:54and it should be transparent. Tell us the outlets you trust.
0:16:54 > 0:16:59First, Steve, if it is beyond control, is there any hope of doing
0:16:59 > 0:17:04anything to rein in not just the abusers but also the fake news
0:17:04 > 0:17:11purveyors? We need to design and architecture
0:17:11 > 0:17:14that is more conducive to high-quality information rather than
0:17:14 > 0:17:21fake news. I share the same concerns about censorship, determining what
0:17:21 > 0:17:24is fake news. We have to understand people respond
0:17:24 > 0:17:33to information, how Facebook and Twitter can be used, and the idea of
0:17:33 > 0:17:36targeting specific individuals based on their personality is a real risk
0:17:36 > 0:17:42to democracy. The reason that is it is happening in private. No one else
0:17:42 > 0:17:47knows what this person has perceived in terms of information. That is
0:17:47 > 0:17:51qualitatively different from the way things used to be where parties
0:17:51 > 0:17:54would put up billboards next to the road and we could all see them and
0:17:54 > 0:18:01knew what the message was. We now have the technology and it isn't the
0:18:01 > 0:18:08Russians, but right here in the UK. They are designing custom designed
0:18:08 > 0:18:12messages shown to people on Facebook. We don't know to what
0:18:12 > 0:18:16extent they are customised. Of the British Government doing it
0:18:16 > 0:18:20in the same way albeit on a smaller scale?
0:18:20 > 0:18:24I am not talking about governments. Do we have a mirror image to what
0:18:24 > 0:18:33Vladimir Putin is doing. I am not an expert.
0:18:33 > 0:18:36I am not an expert.And what was that allegation...The man who has
0:18:36 > 0:18:44the billion-dollar contract...Can I say one other element which is
0:18:44 > 0:18:48related, this started with four companies, Snapchat, Twitter...
0:18:48 > 0:18:57There is censorship going on. It is not as free as you make out. The
0:18:57 > 0:19:02idea of fake news as a price to pay for a free Internet, these companies
0:19:02 > 0:19:06are censoring Google search terms, lots of people saying the articles
0:19:06 > 0:19:13that are not the mainstream, the Atlantic Council, the pro-NATO
0:19:13 > 0:19:16organisations, they are given preferential treatment. In the case
0:19:16 > 0:19:20of harassment everyone here would say these companies have to do more.
0:19:20 > 0:19:28There are not democratically... Steve, finish your point. The
0:19:28 > 0:19:35algorithms thing, you go on Amazon, you buy a book, it tells you the
0:19:35 > 0:19:40same set of books you should buy. It doesn't give you the psychological
0:19:40 > 0:19:46impetus to break away. That is right but it is an
0:19:46 > 0:19:50opportunity, we have the technology to change algorithms and make
0:19:50 > 0:19:57suggestions to people on Amazon taking something is -- outside their
0:19:57 > 0:20:05comfort zone. I like this, and I wish I had the money to buy them.
0:20:05 > 0:20:12But for society it would be better for Amazon to tell me a book I would
0:20:12 > 0:20:15not like. Exactly right. That is the avenue we
0:20:15 > 0:20:20should pursue, to think about clever ways to broaden people's access to
0:20:20 > 0:20:25information without censorship. Editorial control, and the situation
0:20:25 > 0:20:31in Germany as well. What would you like to say?Who do
0:20:31 > 0:20:37we trust? Regarding fake news, it is a subjective thing, and what is the
0:20:37 > 0:20:47real definition CNN? It is a slur which has no objective meaning. As
0:20:47 > 0:20:50it is used it only means a news source I personally disagree with.
0:20:50 > 0:20:56Is it not used to... But if you check the facts behind
0:20:56 > 0:21:01the story?
0:21:02 > 0:21:05the story? I was try to get you some business!
0:21:05 > 0:21:12Thank you. Fake news is now a term used to abuse journalists when they
0:21:12 > 0:21:17hold politicians to account which is a bad thing.Does it have a precise
0:21:17 > 0:21:21definition?We need to recognise there are lots of separate problems.
0:21:21 > 0:21:26It started when people noticed there were teenagers in places like
0:21:26 > 0:21:31Macedonia publishing made up stories to get advertising. That was one
0:21:31 > 0:21:35kind of fake news. Another kind is where you take real data about the
0:21:35 > 0:21:40economy, you distort it for your political campaign. If you put both
0:21:40 > 0:21:45of those in one bucket we will never solve anything. One of them is part
0:21:45 > 0:21:51political debate. You can check a fat, the side of a
0:21:51 > 0:21:56bus, £350 million for the NHS, that is not fake news but a claim you can
0:21:56 > 0:22:08check.Absolutely -- you can check a sacked.
0:22:08 > 0:22:20sacked. -- fact. We can check the legal basis, all of that for you.
0:22:20 > 0:22:26I don't know what your political is for establishing a procedure to
0:22:26 > 0:22:32investigate whether a story is true. Journalism is a qualitative process,
0:22:32 > 0:22:37to obtain information. You don't have hard metrics for establishing
0:22:37 > 0:22:48whether it is true. Four. You are talking about other people's
0:22:48 > 0:22:52journalistic procedures which comes down to the same procedures
0:22:52 > 0:22:59fore-checking whether something is true. There is rarely a
0:22:59 > 0:23:06fundamentally absolutely objective truth underlying any story and it is
0:23:06 > 0:23:10not obvious that is something that can be obtained simply, quickly,
0:23:10 > 0:23:14efficiently by a public or private agency who happens to have some
0:23:14 > 0:23:21greater measure of the tooth.With Lord McAlpine when he was labelled,
0:23:21 > 0:23:24there was an objective truth underneath that which led to the
0:23:24 > 0:23:34court room. Steve? There is a real risk by saying, no
0:23:34 > 0:23:41one knows what the truth is, we are throwing up our hands and saying it
0:23:41 > 0:23:46-- there is too much information, something which has been happening
0:23:46 > 0:23:52on social media and culprit is making that claim in what I call a
0:23:52 > 0:23:56shock and chaos approach to fake news. At the moment we give up on
0:23:56 > 0:24:01this idea that there are certain things we can check like the
0:24:01 > 0:24:12full-scale about the £350 million. And it was false. But the point is,
0:24:12 > 0:24:15there are certain things that are false and other certain things that
0:24:15 > 0:24:25are true. The no group -- the inauguration of crowd for Trump.We
0:24:25 > 0:24:28have an innate ability to critically look at things for us to decide for
0:24:28 > 0:24:37ourselves what is true.. Do we have that critical ability? It is the
0:24:37 > 0:24:43same thing we accuse young jihadists who are radicalised. Maybe we are
0:24:43 > 0:24:51all losing the ability. Some people still stand by the 350 figure, as a
0:24:51 > 0:24:58gross figure, saying that is about the amount of money we can put in.
0:24:58 > 0:25:04Let us point out lots of things are true and false, lots more important
0:25:04 > 0:25:09things we don't know. A large part of what we are doing is to say this
0:25:09 > 0:25:13is as much as we do know and don't know, be put the shades of grey back
0:25:13 > 0:25:24in.I want to come to you.For me, with fake news, a lot of times it
0:25:24 > 0:25:27will come up on your social media profile and you will read the
0:25:27 > 0:25:33headline, how many go on to click? As soon as you click you might
0:25:33 > 0:25:39realise it is fake news. They will read the headline, I know people who
0:25:39 > 0:25:43then actively go on to share it and believe that is true.
0:25:43 > 0:25:52Facebook made a profit of £39 billion. You might say that is
0:25:52 > 0:26:02terrible. But these adverts, they are making money, some money.For
0:26:02 > 0:26:06me, social networking companies should be held to account. We
0:26:06 > 0:26:11mentioned education and the Government have put forward in their
0:26:11 > 0:26:14green paper about compulsory education within schools with regard
0:26:14 > 0:26:20to social media. I believe that is one way forward in that we should be
0:26:20 > 0:26:24educating. We have a whole generation that had been brought up
0:26:24 > 0:26:28with social media. They don't know a life without social media. Shouldn't
0:26:28 > 0:26:34we be educating them on social media?
0:26:34 > 0:26:43How do you counteract the business model? There is a big paradox which
0:26:43 > 0:26:48relies on the fakery? That is right, this is where you
0:26:48 > 0:26:53have the bleeding and from social to traditional media, so much that goes
0:26:53 > 0:26:59on is emotional targeting. Someone will put out a scare headline to get
0:26:59 > 0:27:05people afraid and they will click on it and then realised the story is a
0:27:05 > 0:27:11wind-up.Sometimes it is not. Sometimes it is true. Look at the
0:27:11 > 0:27:15tabloids, they have been doing this for decades, there is emotional
0:27:15 > 0:27:19targeting.Every reason why we shouldn't panic.
0:27:19 > 0:27:29Yes, lots of things are true. We are not machines, the world is really
0:27:29 > 0:27:32new now, and historically every time new communications technology has
0:27:32 > 0:27:39come up people have panicked and tried to limit it. When it comes to
0:27:39 > 0:27:44the app -- the opportunity tabloids we need to be careful.And the
0:27:44 > 0:27:50difference between what the tabloids used to do and Facebook now, one of
0:27:50 > 0:27:53the really important things we know from cognitive science about why
0:27:53 > 0:27:57people stick to their beliefs is because they think they are widely
0:27:57 > 0:28:03shared. With social media we have an opportunity for anyone, no matter
0:28:03 > 0:28:08how absurd their belief, that they can find a community, like-minded
0:28:08 > 0:28:12people on the Internet, and think their belief is widely shared.
0:28:12 > 0:28:16People at their seriously think the earth is flat. You can go on to
0:28:16 > 0:28:22Facebook and have a community of a thousand people around the world.We
0:28:22 > 0:28:28are doing that debate next week! So you will be resistant to changing
0:28:28 > 0:28:36your belief.300 years ago... The last word? Google is one of the
0:28:36 > 0:28:41most powerful companies and is already censoring it, it's not free
0:28:41 > 0:28:48at the moment. From WikiLeaks, we know Google works with Hillary
0:28:48 > 0:28:51Clinton, you mentioned four corporations, this far away from the
0:28:51 > 0:28:57dream of the Internet it should be free. These are multi-billion dollar
0:28:57 > 0:29:03company is censoring already. We need regulation to stop it?Like
0:29:03 > 0:29:08we nationalised the telephone company here, or the post office, we
0:29:08 > 0:29:13can nationalise some of these so they can come under democratic
0:29:13 > 0:29:17accountability.Broadcast organisations in the pocket of the
0:29:17 > 0:29:24Government?Not in the pocket of the Government.Democratically
0:29:24 > 0:29:29accountable. Thank your very much indeed.
0:29:29 > 0:29:33Thank you for your thoughts on that debate.
0:29:33 > 0:29:37You can join in all this morning's debates by logging
0:29:37 > 0:29:39on to bbc.co.uk/thebigquestions, and following the link
0:29:39 > 0:29:40to the online discussion.
0:29:40 > 0:29:44Or you can tweet using the hashtag #bbctbq.
0:29:44 > 0:29:47Tell us what you think about our last Big Question too.
0:29:47 > 0:29:49Should we presume consent for organ donations in England?
0:29:49 > 0:29:52And if you'd like to apply to be in the audience
0:29:52 > 0:29:55at a future show, you can email audiencetbq@mentorn.tv.
0:29:55 > 0:29:57We're in Edinburgh next week, then Newport in South Wales
0:29:57 > 0:30:00on March 11th, and Brighton the week after that.
0:30:07 > 0:30:10Friday saw a successful Second Reading of Geoffrey Robinson's bill
0:30:10 > 0:30:16to change the basis of the organ donor register to one
0:30:16 > 0:30:17of presumed consent in England.
0:30:17 > 0:30:20The Government is going to go ahead with the idea.
0:30:20 > 0:30:22Last autumn, Theresa May indicated her strong support
0:30:22 > 0:30:25of an opt-out system in a letter to Max Johnson, a nine year old boy
0:30:25 > 0:30:27who had received a heart transplant.
0:30:27 > 0:30:30She said it would be known as Max's Law.
0:30:30 > 0:30:34But there are still several hurdles to get across first,
0:30:34 > 0:30:37not least whether a potential donor's family should have a right
0:30:37 > 0:30:43of veto when the final decision must be made.
0:30:43 > 0:30:45Think about that one.
0:30:45 > 0:30:48Wales, just down the road from here in Bath, changed
0:30:48 > 0:30:49to an opt-out system two years ago.
0:30:49 > 0:30:52It's fair to say the results so far are mixed.
0:30:52 > 0:30:58Should we presume consent for organ donations in England?
0:30:58 > 0:31:01Scotland is still waiting on this one and trying to make up their
0:31:01 > 0:31:11minds. Here is the thing, consultant transplant surgeon, welcome, Mike
0:31:11 > 0:31:16Stephens, I have signed up to the register. As an adult, I expressed
0:31:16 > 0:31:21wishes, as an autonomous human being, but my wife or my daughters,
0:31:21 > 0:31:27my mother, they could stop that happening. How can that be right?
0:31:27 > 0:31:34You cannot think of that happening in any other sphere.Well, if you
0:31:34 > 0:31:38phrase it like that, it is not right, but I think you need to look
0:31:38 > 0:31:42at this in the context of the whole discussion. It is interesting we
0:31:42 > 0:31:47start the discussion here because the family's role is unchanged in
0:31:47 > 0:31:53the opt-out system in Wales. They have the same role as in the opt-in
0:31:53 > 0:32:00system in England. The family can overrule their relative's wishes. I
0:32:00 > 0:32:06think the language unionist in your introduction is part of the issue --
0:32:06 > 0:32:13unionist. You need to change that around, really. To make it much more
0:32:13 > 0:32:18about your decision. You make a decision in life and make sure
0:32:18 > 0:32:22people know what that decision is and you make it clear about that and
0:32:22 > 0:32:28then it is much more difficult for families to go against that. The is
0:32:28 > 0:32:33families are not overriding people's wishes, decisions for the sake of
0:32:33 > 0:32:39being awkward -- the truth is. They do not want to make things
0:32:39 > 0:32:44unpleasant.A period of intense grief.Absolutely. We are asking
0:32:44 > 0:32:48families to make decisions that probably the most emotional point in
0:32:48 > 0:32:52their life. When you make a decision when you are emotional, as we all
0:32:52 > 0:32:57know, you do not always make good decisions. Our research in Wales
0:32:57 > 0:33:01shows that if you go back to families who said no took organ
0:33:01 > 0:33:08donation, a few months down the line, many regret the decision. --
0:33:08 > 0:33:13to organ donation.It takes the possibility of regret away?You make
0:33:13 > 0:33:17it clear it is your decision as an individual, you convey your decision
0:33:17 > 0:33:23to your loved ones so they know what it is because in that moment of
0:33:23 > 0:33:27intense emotion, they are already brief, unexpectedly bereaved,
0:33:27 > 0:33:31normally, because that is what organ donors tend to be. You are asking
0:33:31 > 0:33:38them to make this decision. Imagine a scenario whereby you have died,
0:33:38 > 0:33:42your family are there, incredibly upset, somebody comes in and says,
0:33:42 > 0:33:46they were on the organ donor register, you say, hang on, they
0:33:46 > 0:33:52didn't tell me that, I and their wife, I know everything about them,
0:33:52 > 0:33:56why did they not discuss that with me? I don't understand. They go
0:33:56 > 0:34:01through the process of trying to understand. Was this really
0:34:01 > 0:34:05important to them? Was it just something they did when they got a
0:34:05 > 0:34:08driving licence?Presumed consent does not show you have made a
0:34:08 > 0:34:13decision.Well, it doesn't, and the key thing about all of this debate
0:34:13 > 0:34:20is that what the law change has done is given us a platform to have all
0:34:20 > 0:34:24of these discussions, including about what the family's role is, so
0:34:24 > 0:34:29we can put it out there that you have an opportunity to discuss your
0:34:29 > 0:34:33decision in life and then your relatives will know what to do.I
0:34:33 > 0:34:40cannot wait to hear from the audience in a moment. A lot of that
0:34:40 > 0:34:45will have resonated with you, tell us what happened to your son?My
0:34:45 > 0:34:52son, Connor, he was 18 when he was attacked, murdered. Three years ago.
0:34:52 > 0:34:58As a result of his injuries being so severe. Organ donation became an
0:34:58 > 0:35:06option. He had decided that he did agree with organ donation at the
0:35:06 > 0:35:12time, he was only 16. He made that decision. We had a conversation,
0:35:12 > 0:35:16albeit brief, we had a conversation about it. Never for one minute
0:35:16 > 0:35:24thinking we would be put into that position. And then we jumped forward
0:35:24 > 0:35:31two years, that awful night became a reality for us as a family and the
0:35:31 > 0:35:36specialist donor nurse came to speak to us, after lots of discussions
0:35:36 > 0:35:42with the medical team, police, lots of other individuals, to explain
0:35:42 > 0:35:48that Conner would possibly be in a position to become a donor and that
0:35:48 > 0:35:53is when the conversation started. I must say, I had a conversation with
0:35:53 > 0:35:58Conner but his dad had not. Initially, the reception we gave the
0:35:58 > 0:36:04specialist donor nurse was quite hostile, frosty.Really?Because
0:36:04 > 0:36:09from me as a mum, Conner had been through such a horrific ordeal, I
0:36:09 > 0:36:14did not want any more pain for him. I did not want him to be put through
0:36:14 > 0:36:21anything more painful. So with the specialist donor nurse, we talked
0:36:21 > 0:36:25through lots and lots of scenarios, questions, some of them might have
0:36:25 > 0:36:30been really small and insignificant, one of the biggest concerns for me
0:36:30 > 0:36:35was, if we were to continue with this journey, that Conner was never
0:36:35 > 0:36:40on his own, and that was a really big point for me and we had to
0:36:40 > 0:36:46discuss it with
0:36:46 > 0:36:49discuss it with her and never at any point did we feel under pressure to
0:36:49 > 0:36:54consent, we never felt under pressure to continue, if we had made
0:36:54 > 0:36:59a decision that we felt we needed to pull back, then that was OK, that
0:36:59 > 0:37:06was an option for us. But we made the decision, Conner made the
0:37:06 > 0:37:10decision, we just facilitated it. He believed life goes on, his mantra in
0:37:10 > 0:37:15life.Did that in a sense keep you going?That kept us very focused.He
0:37:15 > 0:37:22had the tattoo on his arm. What did it say?Life goes on. His tattoo. It
0:37:22 > 0:37:29was really poignant. But for us, that kept us believing we were doing
0:37:29 > 0:37:36the right thing. That is what it was, for Conner, it was the right
0:37:36 > 0:37:41decision. Emotionally, it wasn't possibly for us at the time, but it
0:37:41 > 0:37:43was about what Conner wanted and that is what we did.
0:37:43 > 0:37:48APPLAUSE
0:37:54 > 0:38:07And lives were saved?Yes, three. APPLAUSE
0:38:07 > 0:38:11Knowing that, that amazing thing, three lives were saved, what is that
0:38:11 > 0:38:18like?It is awesome, to use Conner's words. I remember a brief
0:38:18 > 0:38:23conversation we had at the time and he said, in his own naive
0:38:23 > 0:38:29matter-of-fact way, who wouldn't want a bit of this, mum? That was
0:38:29 > 0:38:37his humour, his belief. To say I am happy, it is the wrong expression.
0:38:37 > 0:38:42But I am comfortable and I am immensely proud that Conner make
0:38:42 > 0:38:48that decision.Can I ask, if you had not had a conversation with him
0:38:48 > 0:38:52beforehand, what would your decision has been on that night?It would
0:38:52 > 0:39:00have been to continue to go through the system. Conner was so strong
0:39:00 > 0:39:03willed, stubborn, knowing his personality, it was a difficult
0:39:03 > 0:39:08decision, by no means was it easy, but together, as a family, we would
0:39:08 > 0:39:14have carried on through the journey. Thoughts from the audience. Wow.
0:39:14 > 0:39:20What would you like to say? I would be interested as well, if there is
0:39:20 > 0:39:29anyone here who would opt-out of the register.As a medical student, I
0:39:29 > 0:39:35had the recent privilege of seeing a kidney transplant and just seeing
0:39:35 > 0:39:39this small grey kidney going pink before my eyes and start working,
0:39:39 > 0:39:44this is astonishing, amazing. I think donation is a wonderful thing
0:39:44 > 0:39:52and the Catholic Church encourage it as well. I think that is a great
0:39:52 > 0:39:58thing. We are here to discuss how we should increase the amount of
0:39:58 > 0:40:03donors, I think most people in the audience...Presumed consent, what
0:40:03 > 0:40:08are your thoughts specifically on that?Not not system, one, it has no
0:40:08 > 0:40:15clear evidence that will increase donors? -- and opt-out system. In
0:40:15 > 0:40:22some cases, it hasn't not increased donors. It is morally dubious and it
0:40:22 > 0:40:25is based upon this notion of presumed consent which is
0:40:25 > 0:40:31nonsensical. How can you say I have said yes to something, I haven't?We
0:40:31 > 0:40:36have a man who knows about the evidence, Professor Roy Thomas. You
0:40:36 > 0:40:40have studied this, looked at the evidence, what is it?We started
0:40:40 > 0:40:45looking at the evidence in 2007 in Wales and that is why we have the
0:40:45 > 0:40:50law now and you have two connecting groups. Connectivity being
0:40:50 > 0:40:56important. Conner, the family, and the donors. The recipients, and the
0:40:56 > 0:41:00donors working together. It is important to realise because we have
0:41:00 > 0:41:0510,000 people waiting in the UK. They call it the invisible death
0:41:05 > 0:41:11row. The invisibility because they do not have advocacy. Brave
0:41:11 > 0:41:18families, like Conner's case, they are important, they are only 1%.
0:41:18 > 0:41:22When they say there is no moral ethical guidance here, there is.
0:41:22 > 0:41:27There is a moral base in Wales for this, it is not about the law, that
0:41:27 > 0:41:32is important. The third group, the group that now can opt-out. That is
0:41:32 > 0:41:40important as well. They can opt-out, perhaps some people argue we say
0:41:40 > 0:41:45opting out of humanity, maybe, that is an argument point in moral
0:41:45 > 0:41:52ethics, but the key thing is we duck and discuss it in the round -- the
0:41:52 > 0:41:57key thing is we look. The ethical debate is important, as we are
0:41:57 > 0:42:01having today, but most people want this law now. Two thirds of the
0:42:01 > 0:42:07people want this law because it saves lives and there are 500 people
0:42:07 > 0:42:12who died last year, five bosses went over the cliffs of Dover, and that
0:42:12 > 0:42:21is a big deal, it used to be one bus in Wales -- five bosses went over
0:42:21 > 0:42:26the cliffs.You put your hand up, gentleman with the glasses, who
0:42:26 > 0:42:32would opt-out?I would opt-out. Organ donation is a very moral
0:42:32 > 0:42:37thing. If you want to be moral and ethical, do not force your morality
0:42:37 > 0:42:45on me, that is unethical. It is quite perverse we are to assume that
0:42:45 > 0:42:48all women and children born after this law passes, the government will
0:42:48 > 0:42:54assume the rights to harvest their organs like a demented keeper, a
0:42:54 > 0:42:57disturbing precedent, not the role of the state. Be moral, donate. But
0:42:57 > 0:43:05do not force it on me.Hand up beside you.I agree. My heart goes
0:43:05 > 0:43:10out to Conner and his mother. It is not some nightmare...Body
0:43:10 > 0:43:17snatchers?We are talking about lives here, lives that can be saved
0:43:17 > 0:43:22by that person making the choice, be it for personal, spiritual or
0:43:22 > 0:43:28religious reasons, they want to opt-out, OK, but the assumption is
0:43:28 > 0:43:34taken however, that we can save human lives with their organs that
0:43:34 > 0:43:39you have agreed to give up, should, God forbid, the worst happen to you
0:43:39 > 0:43:43or a member of your family. A very important point for those who do not
0:43:43 > 0:43:47agree with that, if it was one of your loved ones that desperately
0:43:47 > 0:43:54needed the organ, how would you feel then?Anyone else who would opt-out?
0:43:54 > 0:44:01I just want to know...I am kind of on the fence, brought up in the
0:44:01 > 0:44:07Jewish faith we would not give donations at that point in our life,
0:44:07 > 0:44:13we can give live donations, it is quite a contentious... Sorry?The
0:44:13 > 0:44:16Jewish leaders do not agree with that. They looked deeper, they
0:44:16 > 0:44:22would...The Jewish faith is quite interesting insofar as there are
0:44:22 > 0:44:27many beliefs and many different interpretations, so what I am trying
0:44:27 > 0:44:31to say is I have been brought up in a belief we would not donate,
0:44:31 > 0:44:38however, I have been living... I'm finding this very emotive. My
0:44:38 > 0:44:4411-year-old Sun is likely to need a kidney transplant multiple times in
0:44:44 > 0:44:48his life, currently going through potential bladder reconstruction as
0:44:48 > 0:44:52well, so for me to sit here and say I would expect myself or someone
0:44:52 > 0:45:00asked to donate to him but on death not to...Makes you more likely to
0:45:00 > 0:45:06give than receive? Important point. You have to look at this from so
0:45:06 > 0:45:09many different angles. But I think my inclination would be I would have
0:45:09 > 0:45:13to say that I would not opt-out although I do not believe in the
0:45:13 > 0:45:16system being proposed, I believe that if you are going to come in
0:45:16 > 0:45:20with a system like that, the transition state from how we
0:45:20 > 0:45:25currently are to where you are planning to go towards, it has to be
0:45:25 > 0:45:29managed very carefully, you have to know exactly what it is all about
0:45:29 > 0:45:39and just to presume whether it
0:45:39 > 0:45:41and just to presume whether it is at 16, 18, whatever age, the minute
0:45:41 > 0:45:44your birthday comes, does that mean you have to sign on the dotted line
0:45:44 > 0:45:46to make sure God forbid you are not caught in the two-year window?
0:45:46 > 0:45:51Fascinating points. I will be right with you. So interesting. As you
0:45:51 > 0:45:55say, so moving too, thinking about those situations. Sadly, heart
0:45:55 > 0:46:00health campaigner, critical heart condition, at any moment, you could
0:46:00 > 0:46:06need a heart transplant, if a viable heart was found in the family
0:46:06 > 0:46:12decided ultimately not to consent and to save your life, what would
0:46:12 > 0:46:17that be like for you?
0:46:17 > 0:46:21Of course that would be appalled but I want to approach it a different
0:46:21 > 0:46:26way. As a heart patient, everybody says to me, surely you must be in
0:46:26 > 0:46:33favour of the opt out system? I am not in favour at all because it is
0:46:33 > 0:46:35the word, presumed, that really worries me.
0:46:35 > 0:46:42I have spent the year talking with lots of decision makers who are
0:46:42 > 0:46:48invested in this, charities, the NHS, the team at Papworth Hospital,
0:46:48 > 0:46:52and my conclusion is something that everybody I am sure would agree
0:46:52 > 0:46:57with, the most important part of the process is having a conversation
0:46:57 > 0:47:01with your loved ones. Going for presumed consent can take away the
0:47:01 > 0:47:07need for the conversation. How to make sure we have those
0:47:07 > 0:47:09conversations? I want a mandatory decision making
0:47:09 > 0:47:17process. People have their own thoughts and feelings and emotions
0:47:17 > 0:47:22about this. This isn't about bullying anybody into making the
0:47:22 > 0:47:27decision. What this is about is saying, you need to make a decision.
0:47:27 > 0:47:35I have three children. When my eldest son turned 18, he could vote
0:47:35 > 0:47:40for the first time so we had a right of passage conversation, who will
0:47:40 > 0:47:45you vote for? He could drive, so we discussed never drinking and
0:47:45 > 0:47:50driving. As part of that rite of passage, I think the majority of
0:47:50 > 0:47:54families in this country will sit down together and say, you are 18
0:47:54 > 0:47:59now, you have to make a decision, let us discuss this, this is a rite
0:47:59 > 0:48:05of passage for you. You can tick yes or no but you have to make a
0:48:05 > 0:48:10decision and that forces the conversation, encourages the
0:48:10 > 0:48:12conversation in the family. The heart transplant sessions I have
0:48:12 > 0:48:21spoken to have said they have a care for the patient but also how to care
0:48:21 > 0:48:29for the family. They will never ruin another life to save a rice -- save
0:48:29 > 0:48:35a life. They will never go against wishes because they are humans
0:48:35 > 0:48:38themselves. They don't go into that profession to cause damage and upset
0:48:38 > 0:48:43to others. I do not believe presumed consent is
0:48:43 > 0:48:49the way to go. We have to make a mandatory decision and then educate
0:48:49 > 0:48:57from a very early age. You don't approve of the opt out
0:48:57 > 0:49:04system? Everyone here, we all believe in
0:49:04 > 0:49:08organ donation, we will want to increase organ donation and see more
0:49:08 > 0:49:16transplants. My criticism is it doesn't work. The evidence from the
0:49:16 > 0:49:24Welsh Government report which was still ambivalent, there has been no
0:49:24 > 0:49:28change in the rate. There may be a change in awareness and consent
0:49:28 > 0:49:35rates have gone up but the hard numbers has not happened. I am a
0:49:35 > 0:49:40firm believer in organ donation. If you are happy to receive a
0:49:40 > 0:49:43transplant you should be happy to be a donor. Any other position is
0:49:43 > 0:49:53hypocritical. There are different things we can do.That is
0:49:53 > 0:49:59interesting. Am I right in saying you think there should be a
0:49:59 > 0:50:06prioritisation for those who have agreed?I do. There are different
0:50:06 > 0:50:10systems in the world. Certainly, Israel edged used a system where
0:50:10 > 0:50:15they bring this system of reciprocity. -- have introduced a
0:50:15 > 0:50:22system. There are our priority points, if you are waiting for a
0:50:22 > 0:50:27heart or liver, your medical aid overrides everything. Kidney
0:50:27 > 0:50:36transplantation where we do have dialysis which is not as good...NHS
0:50:36 > 0:50:44should not be about the choices people make in life.
0:50:46 > 0:50:55And the NHS versus private? The figures are really important.
0:50:55 > 0:51:01This is fact, if we knew the answer whether or not opt out what we would
0:51:01 > 0:51:04have done it years ago. We don't have strong statistical evidence to
0:51:04 > 0:51:12prove it. We have got associations but not strong evidence. We may get
0:51:12 > 0:51:17it soon because of what has happened in Wales. But the numbers are small
0:51:17 > 0:51:24and the fluctuations of great. This law change is about consent change,
0:51:24 > 0:51:27a different way of consenting so the only thing that is relevant in terms
0:51:27 > 0:51:35of success is has the consent rate gone up. Year on year since the
0:51:35 > 0:51:43update -- the opt out was introduce in Wales, the rates have gone up.On
0:51:43 > 0:51:48the statistics and arguments? In Belgium in the mid-19 80s they
0:51:48 > 0:51:55introduced opt out. They saw a 50% increase in organ donation rates in
0:51:55 > 0:52:02five years, a clear statistic there for everyone to see. In the opt out
0:52:02 > 0:52:06countries, Spain, Denmark, Norway, they have a better organ donation
0:52:06 > 0:52:14rate than we have in the UK. It is important to look at that. Germany
0:52:14 > 0:52:20hasn't, at the other end of the scale. Facts show presumed consent
0:52:20 > 0:52:25works and studies at Harvard, Chicago, they showed these facts.
0:52:25 > 0:52:32Presumed consent works.Spain is usually cited as the perfect example
0:52:32 > 0:52:39of presumed consent.Spain don't have an opt out register.But
0:52:39 > 0:52:52Belgium does. Wales has not shown the same.It is too early.
0:52:52 > 0:52:54the same.It is too early. We need to take the right lessons from
0:52:54 > 0:53:01Spain. The Spanish have said it has nothing to do with presumed consent
0:53:01 > 0:53:05but investment, education, raising awareness.
0:53:05 > 0:53:10APPLAUSE
0:53:13 > 0:53:17APPLAUSE We have done all those things, we haven't had the consent
0:53:17 > 0:53:23rate increase so it is time the something else in addition.
0:53:23 > 0:53:32I would like to say, I want to thank my donor's family every day, really,
0:53:32 > 0:53:35so much. I had a liver transplant just over a
0:53:35 > 0:53:44year ago. I was one of the lucky ones with how quickly it happened.
0:53:44 > 0:53:52From feeling just tired and being told it was a virus, to going yellow
0:53:52 > 0:53:59and having a life-saving transplant two you -- weeks later. I got my
0:53:59 > 0:54:06gift. Having said I don't agree with opt out, there are Laverty points,
0:54:06 > 0:54:12one is consent, the biggest one is family. At the moment, even if you
0:54:12 > 0:54:17haven't signed up to the register your family can sign up for you.You
0:54:17 > 0:54:25say, my gift. Is it an important concept that it was a gift?You
0:54:25 > 0:54:29can't even get close to what it feels like when you wake up from a
0:54:29 > 0:54:38transplant. APPLAUSE
0:54:39 > 0:54:46I was 48 hours away, I was on a super urgent list where your life is
0:54:46 > 0:54:54in danger. I was at peace with the fact it
0:54:54 > 0:55:00might not happen for me.
0:55:00 > 0:55:04might not happen for me. When I got woken up, I could breathe for
0:55:04 > 0:55:08myself, my transplant coordinator grabbed my hand and said, we have
0:55:08 > 0:55:16found you a liver and it was the most incredible feeling. There was
0:55:16 > 0:55:26hope, it was amazing. Next thing, I was woken up and it is like a
0:55:26 > 0:55:30euphoria, you can't comprehend, there are no words, when someone
0:55:30 > 0:55:36else says the life. It is one thing getting better, battling cancer, but
0:55:36 > 0:55:41when someone else saves your life for you, it changes everything. I
0:55:41 > 0:55:46like to think I speak for all people who have had transplants, we don't
0:55:46 > 0:55:50go back to the lives we had before, we are conscious of the
0:55:50 > 0:55:57responsibility we had to the person who helped keep us alive that we try
0:55:57 > 0:56:04and live bigger and better and richer lives.
0:56:04 > 0:56:07richer lives. Organ donations are incredibly important but it will
0:56:07 > 0:56:14never be as simple as opt in or opt out. Probably one year to the date
0:56:14 > 0:56:20my donor died, my best friend's mum died in the same situation and I saw
0:56:20 > 0:56:23it from the other side. In that moment I realised it is not clean
0:56:23 > 0:56:29cut. But only are you so vulnerable, in agony with grief, but she had
0:56:29 > 0:56:37this huge hope, even if there is no hope. You still think that maybe
0:56:37 > 0:56:44they have got it wrong. That is a huge thing. It is not simple. It has
0:56:44 > 0:56:47to be a conversation, a change in culture.
0:56:47 > 0:56:56On the point about it is not simple as opt in and opt out. In Wales we
0:56:56 > 0:57:01have devised a resource pack due to go out to bring about a conversation
0:57:01 > 0:57:07with young adults around the subject of organ donation. We give lots of
0:57:07 > 0:57:14advice at school, mental health advice, sexual health advice but no
0:57:14 > 0:57:19one likes to talk about the other side, the dark side of life. In this
0:57:19 > 0:57:25pack, we have got a conversation going within groups that will answer
0:57:25 > 0:57:31those questions. Giving those young people the knowledge it is OK not to
0:57:31 > 0:57:35agree. There is no right or wrong answer but furnishing them with the
0:57:35 > 0:57:43information of the process. What are the steps? If they feel they need to
0:57:43 > 0:57:49know those. We spent a long time asking lots of questions and that is
0:57:49 > 0:57:56what the resource pack is for, to give information and to use my son's
0:57:56 > 0:58:01case as a living case. It does matter, these early conversations
0:58:01 > 0:58:08can make a difference. The keyword you used, living.
0:58:08 > 0:58:11That is it. Because three people are alive because of your son.
0:58:11 > 0:58:22Yes, living. It is really important we talked to
0:58:22 > 0:58:28the young people it affects, don't talk to those already buying into it
0:58:28 > 0:58:34or on the donor list, but the young people who need to sign up and don't
0:58:34 > 0:58:38presume their consent, let them make their decision.
0:58:38 > 0:58:40You are a professional, thank you!
0:58:40 > 0:58:42As always, the debates will continue online and on Twitter.
0:58:42 > 0:58:45Next week we're in Edinburgh, so do join us then.
0:58:45 > 0:58:47But for now, it's goodbye from Bath and have a great Sunday.
0:58:47 > 0:58:50APPLAUSE.