I just listened to the Hack episode discussing organ donation. They spoke to a number of different people with a number of different perspectives. The main contention was whether relatives should have the right to veto a person's decision to donate organs. One guy said that having the right to decide to honour his little brother's decision to donate had been empowering and helpful to them. On the other hand, a woman spoke about how she had been the only person in her family who could emotionally deal with the decision to donate her father's corneas. One thing she mentioned was that she found the descriptions of the procedures involved to take the tissues were very, very hard to hear. She felt it only made it more difficult, and provided no benefit at a time when she was distraught.
This got me thinking - it seems reasonable that people should know what they are agreeing to (both family members and people signing up to be organ donors), but the time of someone dying is really not the time to learning it. I think that as part of personal development at high school, the subject of organ donation should be discussed. The technicalities of what the procedures involve can be covered in a more neutral way, and kids can consider their own position on the subject and discuss it with their parents.
The take-home message from the whole story was that the moment of the catastrophic event is not the time to be discussing organ donation - it should be the time to implement what everyone already knows is the understood decision. I think this applies to procedural information as well as the philosophical position.
And for all that, I am an organ donor that knows nothing of the procedures and don't want to. I haven't been in a position to authorise the donation of another person's organs, but I have supported people who have. Still, if I had been told this stuff at school, it would be filed away with those "things I know and don't think about" like the Pelopennisian wars and rice farming in Asia.