Reply to: Defining death: when physicians and families differ

While there may be a place in some contexts for high handed, “blanket” legislative prohibitions on dissenting views of what constitutes death, the paper under consideration does not describe such a context This stimulating and provocative paper by Professor Appel, Defining death: when physicians and...

Full description

Saved in:  
Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Evans, H. M. (Author)
Format: Electronic Article
Language:English
Check availability: HBZ Gateway
Journals Online & Print:
Drawer...
Fernleihe:Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste
Published: BMJ Publ. 2005
In: Journal of medical ethics
Year: 2005, Volume: 31, Issue: 11, Pages: 642-644
Online Access: Volltext (JSTOR)
Volltext (kostenfrei)
Volltext (kostenfrei)

MARC

LEADER 00000naa a22000002 4500
001 1816129496
003 DE-627
005 20220908053417.0
007 cr uuu---uuuuu
008 220908s2005 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c
024 7 |a 10.1136/jme.2005.011866  |2 doi 
035 |a (DE-627)1816129496 
035 |a (DE-599)KXP1816129496 
040 |a DE-627  |b ger  |c DE-627  |e rda 
041 |a eng 
084 |a 1  |2 ssgn 
100 1 |a Evans, H. M.  |e VerfasserIn  |4 aut 
245 1 0 |a Reply to: Defining death: when physicians and families differ 
264 1 |c 2005 
336 |a Text  |b txt  |2 rdacontent 
337 |a Computermedien  |b c  |2 rdamedia 
338 |a Online-Ressource  |b cr  |2 rdacarrier 
520 |a While there may be a place in some contexts for high handed, “blanket” legislative prohibitions on dissenting views of what constitutes death, the paper under consideration does not describe such a context This stimulating and provocative paper by Professor Appel, Defining death: when physicians and families differ, asks us to consider (in the context of United States health care where, we are inclined to suppose, autonomy enjoys a primacy among moral considerations) “whether patients’ families should be permitted to opt out of widely accepted definitions of death in favour of their own standards”. This is a striking question in many ways. It reminds us that, as a simple description of fact, there are indeed different standards for human death in so far as different groups or communities (which can be professional as well as geographical or cultural) have accepted and continue to accept varying notions of what constitutes human death. The question’s reference to “opting out” suggests, perhaps reasonably, that it seems prima facie odd to think of adopting a definition of death as being a matter of individual choice. The reference to “permission” invites us to suppose limitations, primarily legal, upon the extent to which such a choice could be tolerated. Also, the question ascribes to certain “definitions of death” (note the plural) the authority of being widely accepted. The definitions thus favoured are, we learn, the various formulations of death referring to the state of the brain, chief among them “whole brain death” although the author is troublingly vague over whether all such formulations are morally, legally, or conceptually equivalent; and the relevant communities of acceptance turn out to consist of many—but, as the author admits, not all—physicians labouring under varying and inconsistent jurisdictions in the United States. My preface to the criticisms that follow is a … 
773 0 8 |i Enthalten in  |t Journal of medical ethics  |d London : BMJ Publ., 1975  |g 31(2005), 11, Seite 642-644  |h Online-Ressource  |w (DE-627)323607802  |w (DE-600)2026397-1  |w (DE-576)260773972  |x 1473-4257  |7 nnns 
773 1 8 |g volume:31  |g year:2005  |g number:11  |g pages:642-644 
856 |3 Volltext  |u http://www.jstor.org/stable/27719511  |x JSTOR 
856 |u https://jme.bmj.com/content/medethics/31/11/642.full.pdf  |x unpaywall  |z Vermutlich kostenfreier Zugang  |h publisher [open (via free pdf)] 
856 4 0 |u https://doi.org/10.1136/jme.2005.011866  |x Resolving-System  |z kostenfrei  |3 Volltext 
856 4 0 |u http://jme.bmj.com/content/31/11/642.abstract  |x Verlag  |z kostenfrei  |3 Volltext 
935 |a mteo 
951 |a AR 
ELC |a 1 
ITA |a 1  |t 1 
LOK |0 000 xxxxxcx a22 zn 4500 
LOK |0 001 4185583346 
LOK |0 003 DE-627 
LOK |0 004 1816129496 
LOK |0 005 20220908053417 
LOK |0 008 220908||||||||||||||||ger||||||| 
LOK |0 035   |a (DE-Tue135)IxTheo#2022-08-02#E1B0FA29289EE3B7FD51DAF9C36203B43107EC69 
LOK |0 040   |a DE-Tue135  |c DE-627  |d DE-Tue135 
LOK |0 092   |o n 
LOK |0 852   |a DE-Tue135 
LOK |0 852 1  |9 00 
LOK |0 866   |x JSTOR#http://www.jstor.org/stable/27719511 
LOK |0 935   |a ixzs  |a ixrk  |a zota 
OAS |a 1 
ORI |a SA-MARC-ixtheoa001.raw