Here are excerpts from editorials in newspapers around the world that may be of interest to readers of The Royal Gazette:

The Observer, London, on presumed consent for organ donation:

Within a few weeks, the Organ Donation Taskforce, a body set up last year to review the system for finding organs for transplant surgery, is expected to report to the Department for Health.

It will consider the introduction of 'presumed consent' - the system by which those who do not wish their organs to be used in the event of their death would 'opt out' of donorship in advance. At present, organs can only be taken from those who have "opted in." In January, The Observer launched its Donor for Life campaign, arguing in favour of presumed consent. The case is as strong today as it was then.

Three people die every day after waiting for organs. The waiting list is growing while the number of donors is falling. There are 7,901 patients currently in need of donors, but just 3,524 transplants were carried out last year. The heartrending story of one such patient, one-year-old Bethany Dawson, is reported in today's Observer. Reading about her battle for life, it becomes clear that the system must change.

Presumed consent would be a radical measure and controversial. There would be resistance from those who, out of religious conviction or lack of trust in the medical establishment, for example, abhor the state assuming a right to their bodies. Those concerns are fair, but they can be addressed by making the choice to 'opt out' sufficiently easy and by allowing bereaved families the right to refuse donation on behalf of deceased relatives. The overriding moral imperative is behind presumed consent as the surest way to alleviate the suffering of those who desperately need organs, those who, like Bethany, will die without them.

The Manila Times, Philippines, on compensating Filipino soldiers:

Filipino soldiers who fought under the US Army command in World War II will have to mount a third campaign to win equity and recognition as legitimate veterans under American laws.

The new front is the US Senate-House Conference Committee, the bicameral panel that will attempt to narrow down differences between the Senate and House versions of the Filipino Veterans Equity Act of 2008. The Senate had passed its version on July 4, 2008, promising a regular monthly pension, but the House counterpart grants only a one-time lump sum that has displeased many Filipinos.

The veterans had asked for the bill to correct a law that stripped them of veterans status and that would grant them lawful compensation for their services to the US government during the violent Japanese invasion and occupation of the Philippines and other Asia-Pacific countries. ...

The battle now moves to the Senate-House Conference Committee which must decide on an omnibus version of the two bills. ...

We hope S. 1315 would prevail in the conference committee. It promises a more generous monthly pension (to) the veterans and their families. There is money for the widows, too. The House counterpart represents a sad break in the US policy toward veterans and threatens remaining shreds of kinship between the United States and the patriots who risked their lives in its defense.