Religious objections to brain death

The Shifting Landscape of Death by Neurologic Criteria in Pediatrics: Current Controversies and Persistent Questions

Since the concept of death by neurologic criteria (DNC) or "brain death" was articulated by the Harvard Ad Hoc Committee in 1968, efforts to establish and uphold DNC as equivalent to biologic death have been supported through federal and state legislation, professional guidelines, and hospital policies. Despite these endeavors, DNC remains controversial among bioethics scholars and clinicians and is not universally accepted by patient families and the public. In this focused review, we outline the current points of contention surrounding the diagnosis of DNC in pediatric patients. These include physiologic, legal, and philosophical inconsistencies in the definition of DNC, controversy regarding the components of the clinical exam, variability in clinical practice, and ethical concerns regarding justice and role of informed consent. By better understanding these controversies, clinicians may serve families grappling with the diagnosis of DNC more effectively, compassionately, and equitably.

A thematic analysis of a survey of hospital chaplains on death by neurologic criteria

INTRODUCTION

Little is known about chaplains' views on brain death/death by neurologic criteria (BD/DNC). Thematic analysis of comments made by hospital chaplains about BD/DNC can illuminate their perspectives on working with patients, families, and interdisciplinary teams during assessment for BD/DNC.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In an electronic survey distributed to members of five chaplaincy organizations between February and July 2019, we elicited free-text comments about BD/DNC. We performed a thematic analysis of the comments.

RESULTS

Four themes were present: (1) definition of life and death, (2) respect with a subtheme of physician obligation, (3) collaboration with a subtheme of communication, and (4) education with a subtheme of scepticism.

CONCLUSIONS

Hospital chaplains are essential members of the interdisciplinary team involved in BD/DNC evaluation. They aim to ensure the interaction between families and the interdisciplinary team at the boundary of life and death and the intersection between religion and medicine is respectful, collaborative, and educational.

Death by Neurological Criteria: Caring for Families amid Tragedy

When a patient is declared dead using neurological criteria, intense emotional and ethical challenges can follow. In our experience as clinical ethicists, consults surrounding the declaration of "brain death" can be some of the most difficult. In what follows, we describe some best practices related to death by neurological criteria (DNC). We begin with important policies hospitals need to have in place to ensure that death is properly understood by all members of the clinical team and place some limits on the authority of families to demand continued "treatment" for deceased patients. Next, we explain how best to prepare families for the diagnosis. We then discuss how to talk to families when breaking the news concerning DNC. Finally, we describe how to approach a family that is resisting the determination of death.

SUMMARY

This article advises clinicians on how to talk to families about brain death.

Go in Peace: Brain Death, Reasonable Accommodation and Jewish Mourning Rituals

Religious objections to brain death are common among Orthodox Jews. These objections often lead to conflicts between families of patients who are diagnosed with brain death, and physicians and hospitals. Israel, New York and New Jersey (among other jurisdictions) include accommodation clauses in their regulations or laws regarding the determination of death by brain-death criteria. The purpose of these clauses is to allow families an opportunity to oppose or even veto (in the case of Israel and New Jersey) determinations of brain death. In New York, the extent and duration of this accommodation period are generally left to the discretion of individual institutions. Jewish tradition has embraced cultural and psychological mechanisms to help families cope with death and loss through a structured process that includes quick separation from the physical body of the dead and a gradual transition through phases of mourning (Aninut,Kriah, timely burial, Shiva, Shloshim, first year of mourning). This process is meant to help achieve closure, acceptance, support for the bereaved, commemoration, faith in the afterlife and affirmation of life for the survivors. We argue that the open-ended period of contention of brain death under the reasonable accommodation laws may undermine the deep psychological wisdom that informs the Jewish tradition. By promoting dispute and conflict, the process of inevitable separation and acceptance is delayed and the comforting rituals of mourning are deferred at the expense of the bereft family. Solutions to this problem may include separating discussions of organ donation from those concerning the diagnosis of brain death per se, allowing a period of no escalation of life-sustaining interventions rather than unilateral withdrawal of mechanical ventilation, engagement of rabbinical leaders in individual cases and policy formulations that prioritize emotional support for families.

The influence of beliefs on organ donation intention

Purpose

Recent technological developments in healthcare have enabled an increased number of organ transplantation surgeries. At the same time, there is an increase in the number of people awaiting organ transplant, coupled with the difficulty in donation. To bridge this gap, this study aims to propose to evaluate the effect of three types of beliefs (clinical beliefs, financial incentive beliefs and beliefs on the social benefits of altruism and solidarity) on the intention to donate organs. Moreover, this paper uses the attitudes in relation to donation to explain the effect of these beliefs on the intention to donate organs.

Design/methodology/approach

The research was conducted using a survey of 422 Brazilian participants and a mediation analysis to test the mediation hypotheses.

Findings

The results suggest that the effect of three types of beliefs (clinical, economic order and social solidarity) influence the intention to donate organs indirectly through the formation of attitudes concerning organ donation.

Research limitations/implications

This article contributes to the understanding of the formation of organ donation intentions and the role of different types of beliefs in the formation of such intentions.

Originality/value

The findings extend the discussions regarding the role of beliefs in the formation of attitudes and intentions of organ donation and have significant value in creating public policies that further promote organ donation.