Neuroethics 8 (3):299-313 (2015)
Authors | |
Abstract |
BackgroundThe brain death standard allowing a declaration of death based on neurological criteria is legally endorsed and routinely practiced in the West but not in Asia. In China, attempts to legalize the brain death standard have occurred several times without success. Cultural, religious, and philosophical factors have been proposed to explain this difference, but there is a lack of empirical studies to support this hypothesis.Methods476 medical providers from three academic hospitals in Hunan, China, completed a selfadministered survey including a 12-question brain death clinical knowledge assessment and hypothetical vignettes describing brain dead patients.ResultsThe response rate was 95.2 %. Almost all of the providers had heard of the term “brain death.” More than half have encountered presumed brain dead patients. Two-thirds accepted brain death as an ethical standard to determine human death. The mean knowledge score was 8.50 ± 1.83 out of 12. When given the description of a brain dead patient, 50.7 % considered the patient dead, 51.9 % would withdraw life support, and 40.6 % would allow organ procurement. Both provider and patient characteristics contributed to the providers’ decisions. Ethical acceptance was the most important independent predictor for brain death acknowledgement, followed by high knowledge scores, and the belief that the soul lives in the brain. Religious faith and associated beliefs did not have a significant effect.ConclusionsNotwithstanding scarce official accounts, recognition of the brain death standard is not uncommon in China. Chinese medical providers can adequately define the medical characteristics of brain death and accept it in theory, but hesitate to apply it to practice in the vignettes. Legalization is paramount in providing the protection providers need to comfortably declare brain death. However the medical decision-making surrounding brain death is complex and the provider's past experiences and emotions may also influence the process
|
Keywords | Brain death Neurological criteria for death China Medical decision-making |
Categories | (categorize this paper) |
ISBN(s) | |
DOI | 10.1007/s12152-015-9238-3 |
Options |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Download options
References found in this work BETA
The Brain and Somatic Integration: Insights Into the Standard Biological Rationale for Equating Brain Death with Death.D. Alan Shewmon - 2001 - Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 26 (5):457 – 478.
Death and Organ Procurement: Public Beliefs and Attitudes.Laura A. Siminoff, Christopher Burant & Stuart J. Youngner - 2004 - Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal 14 (3):217-234.
Death, Brain Death, and the Limits of Science: Why the Whole-Brain Concept of Death Is a Flawed Public Policy.Mike Nair-Collins - 2010 - Journal of Law, Medicine and Ethics 38 (3):667-683.
East–West Differences in Perception of Brain Death: Review of History, Current Understandings, and Directions for Future Research.Qing Yang & Geoffrey Miller - 2015 - Journal of Bioethical Inquiry 12 (2):211-225.
View all 8 references / Add more references
Citations of this work BETA
Re-Examining the Origin and Application of Determination of Death by Neurological Criteria : A Commentary on “The Case for Reasonable Accommodation of Conscientious Objections to Declarations of Brain Death” by L. Syd M. Johnson.Geoffrey Miller - 2016 - Journal of Bioethical Inquiry 13 (1):27-29.
Similar books and articles
East–West Differences in Perception of Brain Death: Review of History, Current Understandings, and Directions for Future Research.Qing Yang & Geoffrey Miller - 2015 - Journal of Bioethical Inquiry 12 (2):211-225.
Decapitation and the Definition of Death.F. G. Miller & R. D. Truog - 2010 - Journal of Medical Ethics 36 (10):632-634.
Brain Death Revisited: The Case for a National Standard.Eun-Kyoung Choi, Valita Fredland, Carla Zachodni, J. Eugene Lammers, Patricia Bledsoe & Paul R. Helft - 2008 - Journal of Law, Medicine and Ethics 36 (4):824-836.
Analytic Philosophy And Death: Brain Death And Personal Identity.Maurizio Salvi - 1996 - Eubios Journal of Asian and International Bioethics 6 (5):123-124.
Reevaluating the Dead Donor Rule.Mike Collins - 2010 - Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 35 (2):1-26.
Death, Brain Death, and the Limits of Science: Why the Whole-Brain Concept of Death Is a Flawed Public Policy.Mike Nair-Collins - 2010 - Journal of Law, Medicine and Ethics 38 (3):667-683.
Response of Buddhism and Shintō to the Issue of Brain Death and Organ Transplant.Helen Hardacre - 1994 - Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics 3 (4):585.
The Whole-Brain Concept of Death Remains Optimum Public Policy.James L. Bernat - 2006 - Journal of Law, Medicine and Ethics 34 (1):35-43.
Loss of Faith in Brain Death: Catholic Controversy Over the Determination of Death by Neurological Criteria.David Albert Jones - 2012 - Clinical Ethics 7 (3):133-141.
The Problematic Symmetry Between Brain Birth and Brain Death.D. G. Jones - 1998 - Journal of Medical Ethics 24 (4):237-242.
Brain Death and Brainstem Death: Philosophical and Ethical Considerations: David Lamb.David Lamb - 1987 - Royal Institute of Philosophy Supplement 22:231-249.
Analytics
Added to PP index
2015-08-10
Total views
17 ( #594,279 of 2,419,623 )
Recent downloads (6 months)
1 ( #542,420 of 2,419,623 )
2015-08-10
Total views
17 ( #594,279 of 2,419,623 )
Recent downloads (6 months)
1 ( #542,420 of 2,419,623 )
How can I increase my downloads?
Downloads