Controversial proposals to make organ donation automatic unless people opted out were defeated by MPs last night
MPs voted overwhelmingly against the move which would have reversed the current system of opting in for the donation of human organs.
The proposal was aimed at increasing the number of organs available for transplant.
But any hope of a majority of MPs backing the move disappeared when Labour ordered its backbenchers to vote it down.
In the end it was rejected by a 247 majority with 19 Labour MPs, including former ministers Robin Cook and Clare Short, rebelling.
Health Secretary John Reid defended the imposition of a whip on Labour MPs, insisting: "This decision over one's own body is for the conscience - the conscience of individual citizens in this country.
"It is not for this Parliament, by free vote or other vote, to impose upon them a requisition of their bodies after death for the state."
Liberal Democrat Evan Harris spearheaded the move to amend the Human Tissue Bill making donation automatic providing someone had not registered their objections.
Dr Harris said the number of transplants fell last year and suggested presumed consent would help reverse this decline.
But Health Minister Rosie Winterton opposed the move, saying it ran counter to the principle of consent at the heart of the legislation. Describing organ donation as a gift to society, she said: "We have to make sure we enable that gift to be made but don't presume everybody wants to make it."
The Bill aims to prevent a repetition of the organ retention scandals at Bristol Royal Infirmary and Liverpool's Alder Hey, where children's bodies were stripped of their organs without the permission of parents.
Dr Harris said that under the present system more and more patients in desperate need of a transplant were dying before they could be found a suitable organ.
Relatives would still have the right to object to the removal of organs even if the deceased person had failed to opt-out.
An opt-out system "would tackle the real cause of low rates of donation," he said.
It would save more lives, encourage informed decision by potential donors, mean the wishes of the deceased were more likely to be fulfilled and be less of a burden on relatives.
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article