David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Ezio Di Nucci
Jonathan Jenkins Ichikawa
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 26 (5):527 – 537 (2001)
Since the Harvard Committees bold and highly successful attempt to redefine death in 1968 (Harvard Ad Hoc committee, 1968), multiple controversies have arisen. Stimulated by several factors, including the inherent conceptual weakness of the Harvard Committees proposal, accumulated clinical experience, and the incessant push to expand the pool of potential organ donors, the lively debate about the definition of death has, for the most part, been confined to a relatively small group of academics who have created a large body of literature of which this issue of the Journal of Medicine and Philosophy is an example. Law and public policy, however, have remained essentially unaffected. This paper will briefly review the multiple controversies about defining death in an attempt to explain why they have and will remain unresolved in the academic community and have even less chance of being understood and resolved by politicians, legislators, and the general public. Considering this, we will end by suggesting the probable course of public policy and clinical practice in the decades ahead.
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
David Rodríguez-Arias, Maxwell J. Smith & Neil M. Lazar (2011). Donation After Circulatory Death: Burying the Dead Donor Rule. American Journal of Bioethics 11 (8):36-43.
Robert M. Veatch (2005). The Death of Whole-Brain Death: The Plague of the Disaggregators, Somaticists, and Mentalists. Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 30 (4):353 – 378.
D. A. Shewmon (2010). Constructing the Death Elephant: A Synthetic Paradigm Shift for the Definition, Criteria, and Tests for Death. Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 35 (3):256-298.
J. M. Dubois (2010). The Ethics of Creating and Responding to Doubts About Death Criteria. Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 35 (3):365-380.
Joseph A. Raho & Guido Miccinesi (2015). Contesting the Equivalency of Continuous Sedation Until Death and Physician-Assisted Suicide/Euthanasia: A Commentary on LiPuma. Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 40 (5):529-553.
Similar books and articles
Winston Chiong (2005). Brain Death Without Definitions. Hastings Center Report 35 (6):20-30.
Bernard N. Schumacher (2010). Death and Mortality in Contemporary Philosophy. Cambridge University Press.
Elysa R. Koppelman (2003). The Dead Donor Rule and the Concept of Death: Severing the Ties That Bind Them. American Journal of Bioethics 3 (1):1 – 9.
Megan Crowley-Matoka & Robert M. Arnold (2004). The Dead Donor Rule: How Much Does the Public Care ... And How Much Should. Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal 14 (3):319-332.
Kristin Zeiler (2009). Deadly Pluralism? Why Death-Concept, Death-Definition, Death-Criterion and Death-Test Pluralism Should Be Allowed, Even Though It Creates Some Problems. Bioethics 23 (8):450-459.
Mike Nair-Collins (2010). Death, Brain Death, and the Limits of Science: Why the Whole-Brain Concept of Death Is a Flawed Public Policy. Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics 38 (3):667-683.
Tom Tomlinson (1984). The Conservative Use of the Brain-Death Criterion – a Critique. Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 9 (4):377-394.
Daniel I. Wikler (1984). Conceptual Issues in the Definition of Death: A Guide for Public Policy. Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 5 (2).
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads15 ( #297,055 of 1,940,948 )
Recent downloads (6 months)2 ( #333,818 of 1,940,948 )
How can I increase my downloads?