Brain Death

This article is an attempt to clarify a confusion in the brain death literature between logical sufficiency/necessity and natural sufficiency/necessity. We focus on arguments that draw conclusions regarding empirical matters of fact from conceptual or ontological definitions. Specifically, we critically analyze arguments by Tom Tomlinson and Michael B. Green and Daniel Wikler. which, respectively, confuse logical and natural sufficiency and logical and natural necessity. Our own conclusion is that it is especially important in discussing the brain death issue to observe (...) the distinction between logical and natural sufficiency/necessity in a strict fashion. (shrink)

In Japan, modern biomedical ethics emerged in the early 1980s. One of the main triggers was the nationwide debate on organ transplantation and brain death. A lengthy process of academic, religious, and political discussion concerning organ transplantation, lasting well over a few decades, resulted in the enactment of the Organ Transplantation Law in 1997.1 The defining of death and other bioethical issues, including death with dignity and euthanasia, were also stimulating topics throughout the latter end of the twentieth century. For (...) instance, the death-with-dignity movement, which started around the late 1960s, developed into a hospice/palliative-care movement by the end of the 1980s. (shrink)

As of 2009, the number of donors in Japan is the lowest among developed countries. On July 13, 2009, Japan's Organ Transplant Law was revised for the first time in 12 years. The revised and old laws differ greatly on four primary points: the definition of death, age requirements for donors, requirements for brain- death determination and organ extraction, and the appropriateness of priority transplants for relatives.In the four months of deliberations in the National Diet before the new law was (...) established, various arguments regarding brain death and organ transplantation were offered. An amazing variety of opinions continue to be offered, even after more than 40 years have elapsed since the first heart organ transplant in Japan. Some are of the opinion that with the passage of the revised law, Japan will finally become capable of performing transplants according to global standards. Contrarily, there are assertions that organ transplants from brain- dead donors are unacceptable because they result in organs being taken from living human beings.Considering the current conditions, we will organize and introduce the arguments for and against organ transplants from brain- dead donors in contemporary Japan. Subsequently, we will discuss the primary arguments against organ transplants from brain- dead donors from the perspective of contemporary Japanese views on life and death. After introducing the recent view that brain death should not be regarded as equivalent to the death of a human being, we would like to probe the deeply-rooted views on life and death upon which it is based. (shrink)

Patrick Lee and Germain Grisez have argued that the total brain dead patient is still dead because the integrated entity that remains is not even an animal, not only because he is not sentient but also, and more importantly, because he has lost the radical capacity for sentience. In this essay, written from within and as a contribution to the Catholic philosophical tradition, I respond to Lee and Grisez’s argument by proposing that the brain dead patient is still sentient because (...) an animal with an intact but severed spinal cord can still perceive and respond to external stimuli. The brain dead patient is an unconscious sentient organism. (shrink)

While there are numerous doubts, controversies and lack of consensus on alternative definitions of human death, it is argued that it is more ethical to allow people to choose either cessation of cardio-respiratory function or loss of entire brain function as the definition of death based on their own views. This paper presents the law of organ transplantation in Japan, which allows people to decide whether brain death can be used to determine their death in agreement with their family. Arguably, (...) Japan could become a unique example of individual choice in the definition of death if the law is revised to allow individuals choose definition of death independently of their family. It suggests that such an approach is one of the reasonable policy options a country can adopt for legislation on issues related to the definition of death. (shrink)

: The 1997 Japanese organ transplantation law is the fruit of a long debate on "brain death" and organ transplantation, which involved the general public and experts in the relevant fields. The aim of this paper is to trace the history of the implementation of the law and to critique the law in terms of its consistency and fairness. The paper argues that the legislation adopts a double standard regarding the role of the family. On the one hand, the legislation (...) overemphasizes the family's authority by granting the family a veto on the matter of organ transplantation, while, on the other hand, not allowing the family to make surrogate decisions. In addition, the role of the law in cases involving minor or incompetent patients is shown to be similarly misguided. The paper argues that accepting a decisive role for the family in current law is compatible with Japanese culture. (shrink)

Bioethics, neuroscience, medicine are contributing to a debate on the definition and criteria of death. This topic is very controversial, and it demonstrates clashing views on the meaning of human life and death. Official medical and legal positions agree upon a biological definition of death as irreversible cessation of integrated functioning of the organism as a whole, and whole-brain criterion to ascertain death. These positions have to face many criticisms: some scholars speak of logical and practical inconsistency, some others of (...) invalid scientific theory about the supreme integrator. In this paper some criticisms are exposed and discussed in order to reconstruct the state of the art in bioethical debate. -/- . (shrink)

La cosiddetta “morte cerebrale totale”, o più correttamente “morte encefalica” (whole brain death), è un criterio fisiologico riferito alla cessazione irreversibile e permanente di tutte le funzioni dell’encefalo (emisferi e tronco encefalico), ed è correlato alla cessazione del funzionamento integrato dell’organismo. L’applicazione del criterio neurologico, e degli esami che lo accompagnano, è finalizzato ad una diagnosi clinica e strumentale per individuare una condizione causata da lesioni neurologiche diffuse e responsabili di coma, assenza di coscienza, di respirazione spontanea, di risposte agli (...) stimoli esterni, e di attività elettrica cerebrale in pazienti collegati alle macchine per la rianimazione. La diagnosi consente la dichiarazione legale di morte. L’assunto scientifico alla base dell’impiego del criterio neurologico è la teoria dell’integratore centrale, secondo la quale l’encefalo è responsabile del funzionamento integrato e coordinato dell’organismo. Questo contributo ricostruisce a grandi linee il dibattito bioetico italiano sui criteri per l’accertamento della morte, prestando attenzione anche ai recenti sviluppi della discussione sui mass media. (shrink)

Nel quarantesimo anniversario della pubblicazione del rapporto di Harvard, ricordato da un editoriale di Lucetta Scaraffia sull’ “Osservatore Romano” il 3 settembre 2008, la riflessione sui criteri neurologici per accertare il decesso è sembrata giungere finalmente all’attenzione del pubblico italiano, dopo i dibattiti avviati nello scorso decennio in Gran Bretagna, Germania, Giappone e negli Stati Uniti. Per alcuni giorni sulle pagine dei quotidiani nazionali si sono alternate repliche, più o meno indignate, a quell’articolo e prese di posizione; poi, come è (...) d’uso, le luci si sono spente ed il sipario è ancora una volta calato su una problematica neppure scalfita dalla ribalta giornalistica. -/- In questa sede intendiamo chiarire come la discussione sull’uso dei criteri neurologici per determinare il decesso non sia frutto di un mero dissenso filosofico o teologico (impressione che un frettoloso lettore di quotidiani potrebbe avere ricevuto) sul significato della morte e dell’essere morto; il ripensamento dei fondamenti teorico-scientifici addotti per giustificare l’impiego di quei criteri è stato originato da evidenze empiriche, delle quali proprio dei medici sono stati testimoni. (shrink)

Ricostruzione del dissenso etico-filosofico relativo all'impiego del criterio neurologico della morte encefalica al fine della dichiarazione di decesso e del prelievo di organi per il trapianto. Esame del dibattito italiano e dei documenti di organismi ufficiali come il Centro Nazionale Trapianti (2009) ed il Comitato Nazionale per la Bioetica (2010).

Review of a book on brain death and organ transplantation.

I criteri neurologici per accertare il decesso, da impiegare in alternativa a quelli cardiorespiratori se il paziente ha subìto lesioni cerebrali e si trova collegato alle apparecchiature per la ventilazione artificiale, sono entrati nell’uso comune della pratica medica occidentale da circa quarant’anni ed il consenso di cui essi godono nella comunità scientifica sembra, a prima vista, essere ancora oggi molto solido. Si diceva a prima vista, perché se si esamina con attenzione la letteratura dal 1992 ad oggi, si possono scoprire (...) i crescenti numeri del dissenso: ripensamenti e critiche provengono soprattutto da esperti di area medico-biologica, che associano le loro voci a quelle di filosofi, teologi, studiosi di etica. I motivi del dissenso sono molteplici, e l’ampia letteratura che li documenta riguarda la teoria scientifica posta a fondamento dei criteri neurologici, ed evidenzia le contraddizioni, teoriche ed applicative, derivanti dall’uso di quei criteri. (shrink)

Sintesi delle tappe attraverso cui si è giunti alla formulazione di una teoria a sostegno dei criteri neurologici e alla loro introduzione nella prassi medico-legale per individuare le cause di un ripensamento critico dei fondamenti teorico-scientifici addotti per giustificare i criteri neurologici utilizzati per dichiarare la morte di pazienti con lesioni cerebrali collegati alle apparecchiature per la ventilazione artificiale.

Sono discusse le principali argomentazioni medico-biologiche che costituiscono il nucleo della teoria secondo la quale la morte cerebrale totale corrisponde alla morte dell'essere umano. Speciale attenzione è riservata alla normativa che disciplina l’applicazione dei criteri per l'accertamento di morte e alle critiche che hanno mostrato come attualmente la teoria che fa da sostegno a quella normativa sia stata radicalmente messa in discussione.

Death in the Clinic fills a gap in contemporary medical education by explicitly addressing the concrete clinical realities about death with which practitioners, patients, and their families continue to wrestle. Visit our website for sample chapters!

This paper is based on the hypothesis that the effort to establish new criteria for diagnosing human death, which has been taking place over the past twenty years or more, can be viewed as a paradigm case for the impact of scientific and technological progress on morality. This impact takes the form of three tendencies within the change in morality, which may be characterized as ‘denaturalization’, ‘functionalization’ and ‘homogenization’. The paper concludes with the view that these tendencies do not indicate (...) a decline of morality, as feared by some authors, but rather a structural change. Keywords: bioethics (Institutionalization and Professionalization of), brain death, brain life, moral reflexivity, organ transplantation CiteULike Connotea Del.icio.us What's this? (shrink)

Concepts, such as death, life and spirit cannot be known in their quintessential nature, but can be defined in accordance with their effects. In fact, those who think within the mode of pragmatism and Cartesian logic have ignored the metaphysical aspects of these terms. According to Islam, the entity that moves the body is named the soul. And the aliment of the soul is air. Cessation of breathing means leaving of the soul from the body. Those who agree on the (...) diagnosis of brain death may not able to agree unanimously on the rules that lay down such diagnosis. That is to say, there are a heap of suspicions regarding the diagnosis of brain death, and these suspicions are on the increase. In fact, Islamic jurisprudence does not put provisions, decisions on suspicious grounds. By virtue of these facts, it can be asserted that brain death is not absolute death according to Islamic sources; for in the patients diagnosed with brain death the soul still has not abandoned the body. Therefore, these patients suffer in every operation performed on them. (shrink)

The current debate regarding the suitability of anencephalics as organ donors is due primarily to misunderstandings. The anatomical and neurophysiological literature shows that the anencephalic lacks a cerebrum because of the failure of neuralplate fusion. However, even the incomplete function of an atrophic brain stem is currently accepted at law in most if not all countries as sufficient for brain life: which is to say, cessation of breathing is currently required in order to make the diagnosis of brain death. Because (...) of the extensive incompleteness of the anencephalic's brain, it is not possible to postpone death significantly by mechanical ventilation and intravenous feeding. It is acceptable to maintain life for a short period of time in order to allow organ transplantation subsequent to the declaration of death at the point of cessation of the capacity for spontaneous respiration. The most important issue is not transplantation, but the issue of brain life raised by the case of anencephalics. Since brain life in any significant sense begins only after the closure of the neural tube on the 30th day after conception, it is reasonable to take this as the point at which brain life begins. Laws should be amended in all countries to allow the abortion of anencephalics at any time, in that they do not at any time possess brain life. (shrink)

The victim’s upper brain is destroyed. He’s a living corpse, but his organs are alive and warm and happy until they can be taken out by the butchers at the Institute. Karen Ann Quinlan wasn’t dead. But, terrifyingly, she wasn’t fully alive, either. Maybe she was no longer human. A smear like “death panels” emerges and catches fire because it’s fundamentally interesting. You could write a great thriller . . . about death panels. As I write, a single phrase dominates (...) public discussion of health-care reform in the United States: “death panels.” Its power cannot lie in its referential accuracy or be diminished by arguing, even with irrefutable evidence, that it is a misrepresentation. The .. (shrink)

I never saw a dead body until my first anatomy class. Today those who have willed their bodies to science receive letters of gratitude, visit with our students, and have their names put up on memorial plaques; but 37 years ago our subjects were derelicts and anonymous old men found dead in flop house hotels. George C, his name written on a tag tied to one toe, lay stretched out on one of the six dissecting tables in the anatomy laboratory (...) that autumn morning when 1 was 22 and beginning medical school. I remember hesitating at the door and then joining my four partners at Mr. C.'s side, trepidation giving way to curiosity, the moment imprinted forever in my memory by the smell of formalin. (shrink)

“Brain death,” the determination of human death by showing the irreversible loss of all clinical functions of the brain, has become a worldwide practice. A biophilosophical account of brain death requires four sequential tasks: agreeing on the paradigm of death, a set of preconditions that frame the discussion; determining the definition of death by making explicit the consensual concept of death; determining the criterion of death that proves the definition has been fulfilled by being both necessary and sufficient for death; (...) and determining the tests of death for physicians to employ at the patient's bedside to demonstrate that the criterion of death has been fulfilled. The best definition of death is “the cessation of functioning of the organism as a whole.” The whole-brain criterion is the only criterion that is both necessary and sufficient for death. Brain death tests are used only in the unusual case in which a patient's ventilation is being supported. Brain death critics have identified weaknesses in its formulation. But despite its shortcomings, the whole-brain death formulation comprises a concept and public policy that make intuitive and practical sense and that has been well accepted by many societies. (shrink)