Rather an opt-in system but I can see the logic in automatically dispensing organs to donors on the list, if an organ becomes available and the person cannot be revived and is pronounced brain dead. Of course, there is always the exception of those who can be revived later on despite being pronounced dead. However, burying a body with organs where they later deteriorate or using cremation doesn't benefit anyone. The buried body simply takes up more earthly space in a cemetery, exhausting more natural resources such as land or creating more pollution through ash scattered somewhere on land or water. Would make sense to make use of the organs where they are beneficial to others especially if they are immediately available. It would make me feel worse to know that I died when someone's life could be saved with an organ donation. However, people do have the right to leave the earth with their complete body in tact. It could also make the family feel uncomfortable knowing their son or daughter's heart or other body part is somewhere out there in someone's body and they had no choice in the matter. The potential for abuse is great though if they were to give hospitals the last call. Even if health professionals do their due diligence to ensure everything is done to treat a patient and save a life, mistakes happen undeniably. A hospital's liability insurance would likely go through the roof if they where given the last minute option to take someone's organs. As [MENTION=4361]Elis[/MENTION] mentioned, there would be some major concerns about the nature of "consent." However, I do understand the reasoning that it would make sense to fill the need for more organs with the supply that's immediately available. Even if someone didn't initially opt-in doesn't mean they wouldn't want to donate, despite loss of life. Definitely complicated issue. But it's fair to look at different angles.