首页> 外文期刊>The Neurodiagnostic journal >Ellen Grass Memorial Lecture: Brain Death: Useful Myth or Problem Waiting to Happen?
【24h】

Ellen Grass Memorial Lecture: Brain Death: Useful Myth or Problem Waiting to Happen?

机译:艾伦·格拉斯(Ellen Grass)纪念演讲:脑死亡:有用的神话或等待发生的问题?

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

In this paper, I will argue that in an intensive care environment, the exact moment of death is neither a scientific nor philosophical "fact." Rather, it is a socially constructed notion used to maximize organ procurement while avoiding responsibility for killing patients by removing their organs-the so-called dead donor rule. I will first review the tremendous importance of the declaration of death in all societies and point out how it once was and now has again become problematic. Next, I will review the importance of distinguishing among definitions, criteria, and tests. I will conclude that the current protocols for taking organs from brain-dead patients do so by maintaining several legal and clinical fictions. They are fictions because they are conceptually and clinically suspect and have been created primarily to avoid controversy. This has allowed removal of organs that save and improve many thousands of lives. I will argue that while brain-dead patients are not certainly dead, they are certainly beyond harm. In this sense, they are as good as dead as long as they and their families have agreed to organ procurement. Whether the current fictions about brain death are durable remains to be seen.
机译:在本文中,我将指出,在重症监护环境中,确切的死亡时刻既不是科学事实,也不是哲学上的“事实”。相反,它是一种社会建构的概念,用于最大化器官采购,同时避免通过移走器官杀死病人的责任-所谓的死者捐献规则。我将首先回顾在所有社会中宣布死亡的巨大重要性,并指出它曾经是,现在又变成了问题。接下来,我将回顾区分定义,标准和测试的重要性。我将得出结论,现行的从脑死亡患者中获取器官的方案是通过维持多种法律和临床虚构来实现的。它们是虚构的,因为它们在概念上和临床上都是可疑的,并且主要是为了避免引起争议而创建的。这样就可以去除可以拯救和改善数千条生命的器官。我将辩称,虽然脑死亡患者不一定死亡,但他们肯定不会受到伤害。从这个意义上讲,只要他们及其家人同意进行器官采购,他们就好坏了。当前关于脑死亡的假说是否持久,还有待观察。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号