Donation After the Circulatory Determination of Death: Some Responses to Recent Criticisms

Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 43 (2):211-240 (2018)
  Copy   BIBTEX


This article defends the criterion of permanence as a valid criterion for declaring death against some well-known recent objections. We argue that it is reasonable to adopt the criterion of permanence for declaring death, given how difficult it is to know when the point of irreversibility is actually reached. We claim that this point applies in all contexts, including the donation after circulatory determination of death context. We also examine some of the potentially unpalatable ramifications, for current death declaration practices, of adopting the irreversibility criterion.



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 92,991

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Permanence can be Defended.Andrew Mcgee & Dale Gardiner - 2016 - Bioethics 31 (3):220-230.
Restoring the Organism as a Whole: Does NRP Resurrect the Dead?Emil J. N. Busch - 2024 - American Journal of Bioethics 24 (6):27-33.
Potentiality, irreversibility, and death.John P. Lizza - 2005 - Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 30 (1):45 – 64.


Added to PP

18 (#858,958)

6 months
5 (#711,375)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Citations of this work

Human Nature and Moral Status in Bioethics.Matthew Shea - 2018 - Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 43 (2):115-131.

Add more citations