Certainly, intuitively it would seem to us that it's a silver bullet. However, when we research the matter and go to the other jurisdictions, we find out that it's not, because the family is still—in all of those countries—required to consent, and because of presumed consent they would never have had the discussion. There's no trigger or reason for a family to have ever discussed it, so the families will say they don't know that their relative really read the small print and understood that he was defaulting to yes and they don't think he would have wanted it.
We recently had visitors from Singapore who've had presumed consent for a decade, and they came to find out how to increase their donor rate. France—you would have read about this a few months ago in the paper—sounded as though they were putting in presumed consent. They have in fact had presumed consent since 1976. What they are doing is putting in a requirement for the family, if they will not consent, to bring a signed paper from the person who passed away saying that he or she did not agree to be a donor.
Although intuitively it sounds as though it would be the answer, empirically it has not proven to be.