Off-campus access
Using PhilPapers from home?
Click here to configure this browser for off-campus access.
- Grant Gillett (1992). Coma, Death and Moral Dues: A Response to Serafini. Bioethics 6 (4):375–377.
Similar books and articles
This Comment considers the sentencing of Palm Islander man, Lex Patrick Wotton, for his involvement in the protest following the death in custody of Mulrunji. It examines the protest as a response to the police role in the death and the police mishandling of the consequent investigation. The Comment critiques the media trial that paralleled Wotton’s court trial. The mainstream media, along with the Queensland Government and police union, produced a moral panic over the Palm Island protest that overshadowed the death in custody. This Comment argues that the court that sentenced Wotton appropriated the moral panic over the offence to remove the death in custody as a sentencing factor.
Introduction -- Life -- Death -- Challenges -- Mortal harm -- The timing puzzle -- Killing -- Suicide and euthanasia -- Abortion.
This paper assesses two reformulations of Epicurus' argument that "death ... is nothing to us, since while we exist, death is not present; and whenever death is present, we do not exist." The first resembles many contemporary reformulations in that it attempts to reach the conclusion that death is not to the disadvantage of its subject. I argue that this rather anachronistic sort of reformulation cannot succeed. The second reformulation stays closer to the spirit of Epicurus' actual position on death by attempting to reach the conclusion that it is inappropriate to fear or dread or have any other negative affective response towards death. I raise a plausible objection to this argument, suggesting that dissatisfaction is sometimes an appropriate response to the approach of death. I then go on to consider the possibility that Epicurus was partly right in that it may always be inappropriate to dread death.
All-encompassing text examines every aspect of coma from neurochemistry, monitoring, and treatments to prognostic factors.
The case of Terri Schiavo, a young woman who spent 15 years in a persistent vegetative state, has emerged as a watershed in debates over end-of-life care. While many observers had thought the right to refuse medical treatment was well established, this case split a family, divided a nation, and counfounded physicians, legislators, and many of the people they treated or represented. In renewing debates over the importance of advance directives, the appropriate role of artificial
hydration and nutrition, and the responsibilities of family members, the case also became one of history's most extensively litigated health care disputes. The Case of Terri Schiavo assembles a team of first-hand participants and content experts to provide thoughtful and nuanced analyses. In addition to
a comprehensive overview, the book includes contributions by Ms. Schiavo's guardian ad litem, a neurologist and lawyer who participated in the case, and scholars who examine issues related to litigation, faith, gender, and disability. The volume also includes a powerful dissent from the views of many scholars in the bioethics community. The book is intended for students, health care professionals, policy makers, and other in search of carefully reasoned analyses of the case that will shape our
view of death and end-of-life medical care for decades.
: Research by Siminoff and colleagues reveals that many lay people in Ohio classify legally living persons in irreversible coma or persistent vegetative state (PVS) as dead and that additional respondents, although classifying such patients as living, would be willing to procure organs from them. This paper analyzes possible implications of these findings for public policy. A majority would procure organs from those in irreversible coma or in PVS. Two strategies for legitimizing such procurement are suggested. One strategy would be to make exceptions to the dead donor rule permitting procurement from those in PVS or at least those who are in irreversible coma while continuing to classify them as living. Another strategy would be to further amend the definition of death to classify one or both groups as deceased, thus permitting procurement without violation of the dead donor rule. Permitting exceptions to the dead donor rule would require substantial changes in law—such as authorizing procuring surgeons to end the lives of patients by means of organ procurement—and would weaken societal prohibitions on killing. The paper suggests that it would be easier and less controversial to further amend the definition of death to classify those in irreversible coma and PVS as dead. Incorporation of a conscience clause to permit those whose religious or philosophical convictions support whole-brain or cardiac-based death pronouncement would avoid violating their beliefs while causing no more than minimal social problems. The paper questions whether those who would support an exception to the dead donor rule in these cases and those would support a further amendment to the definition of death could reach agreement to adopt a public policy permitting organ procurement of those in irreversible coma or PVS when proper consent is obtained.
The main goal of Brain Death and Disorders of Consciousness is to provide a suitable scientific platform to discuss all topics related to human death and coma.
In this article I contend that the tendency to equate coma with anencephalia is a mistake. A key idea here is that there is a type of "mental-state" predicate that is applicable to the comatose but not to anencephalics. One of the moral implications of this is that the concept of "brain death", its alleged popularity notwithstanding, is badly confused. Also, because anencephalics have no mental life, there are few moral grounds for hesitating to use anencephalics as organ donors.
Discussion of Grant Gillett, Coma, death and moral dues: A response to Serafini
|
|
There are no threads in this forum |
Nothing in this forum yet.

