Pro/con ethics debate: when is dead really dead?

Cryonics: Science or Religion

Cryonics involves the low-temperature freezing of human corpses in the hope that they will one day be reanimated. Its advocates see it as a medical treatment but as in any medical procedure, this presupposes some scientific evidence. This paper examines the scientific basis of this technology and argues that cryonics is based upon assertions which have never been (and potentially can never be empirically demonstrated) scientifically. After providing a general overview of cryogenic preservation, I discuss how advocates of this technology have conceptualized death and more specifically their notion of information-theoretic death. I conclude that cryonics is based upon a naive faith rather than upon science. It does what David Chidester (2005) calls 'religious work,' even if it is not explicitly religious. It offers transcendence over death.

Healthcare Professionals’ Understandings of the Definition and Determination of Death: A Scoping Review

Background.

During the 1950s, advances in critical care, and organ transplantation altered the relationship between organ failure and death. There has since been a shift away from traditional cardiocirculatory based to brain-based criteria of death, with resulting academic controversy, despite the practice being largely accepted worldwide. Our objective is to develop a comprehensive description of the current understandings of healthcare professionals regarding the meaning, definition, and determination of death.

Methods.

Online databases were used to identify papers published from 2003 to 2020. Additional sources were searched for conference proceedings and theses. Two reviewers screened papers using predefined inclusion and exclusion criteria. Complementary searches and review of reference lists complemented the final study selection. A data extraction instrument was developed to iteratively chart the results of the review. A qualitative approach was conducted to thematically analyze the data.

Results.

Seven thousand four hundred twenty-eight references were identified. In total, 75 papers met the inclusion criteria. Fourteen additional papers were added from complementary searches. Most were narratives (35%), quantitative investigations (21%), and reviews (18%). Identified themes included: (1) the historical evolution of brain death (BD), (2) persistent controversies about BD and death determination, (3) wide variability in healthcare professionals’ knowledge and attitudes, (4) critical need for BD determination revision.

Conclusions.

We concluded that although BD is widely accepted, there exists variation in healthcare providers’ understanding of its conceptual basis. Death determination remains a divisive issue among scholars. This review identified a need for increased opportunities for formal training on BD among healthcare providers.

The Metaphysical Irreversibility of Death

The popularization of the term "clinical death" for the absence of vital signs suggests the possibility of a radical change in our understanding of death. While death used to be considered something that we do not have the power to reverse, contemporary optimism suggests that we may be able to restore life to a dead organism. In this article, I examine how the term "death" is used today to clarify what kind of irreversibility we ought to assign to it. I conclude that the kind of irreversibility closest to our concept of death is one that depends on implicit metaphysical commitments: we generally treat death as though it were metaphysically irreversible, and therefore not reversible by us.

Does uncontrolled cardiac death for organ donation raise ethical questions? An opinion survey

BACKGROUND

Organ donation after uncontrolled cardiac death raises complex ethical issues. We conducted a survey in a large hospital staff population, including caregivers and administrators, to determine their ethical viewpoints regarding organ donation after uncontrolled cardiac death.

METHODS

Multicenter observational survey using a questionnaire, including information on the practical modalities of the procedure. Respondents were asked to answer 15 detailed ethical questions corresponding to different ethical issues raised in the literature. Ethical concerns was defined when respondents expressed ethical concerns in their answers to at least three of nine specifically selected ethical questions.

RESULTS

One thousand one hundred ninety-six questionnaires were received, and 1057 could be analysed. According to our definition, 573 respondents out of 1057 (54%) had ethical concerns with regard to donation after cardiac death and 484 (46 %) had no ethical concerns. Physicians (55%) and particularly junior intensivists (65%) tended to have more ethical issues than nurses (52%) and hospital managers (37%). Junior intensivists had more ethical issues than senior intensivists (59%), emergency room physicians (46%) and transplant specialists (43%).

CONCLUSION

Only 46% of hospital-based caregivers and managers appear to accept easily the legitimacy of organ donation after cardiac death. A significant number of respondents especially intensivists, expressed concerns over the dilemma between the interests of the individual and those of society. These results underline the need to better inform both healthcare professionals and the general population to help to the development of such procedure.

A 10min "no-touch" time - is it enough in DCD? A DCD animal study

Donation after cardiac death (DCD) is under investigation because of the lack of human donor organs. Required times of cardiac arrest vary between 75s and 27min until the declaration of the patients' death worldwide. The aim of this study was to investigate brain death in pigs after different times of cardiac arrest with subsequent cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) as a DCD paradigm. DCD was simulated in 20 pigs after direct electrical induction of ventricular fibrillation. The "no-touch" time varied from 2min up to 10min; then 30min of CPR were performed. Brain death was determined by established clinical and electrophysiological criteria. In all animals with cardiac arrest of at least 6min, a persistent loss of brainstem reflexes and no reappearance of bioelectric brain activity occurred. Reappearance of EEG activity was found until 4.5min of cardiac arrest and subsequent CPR. Brainstem reflexes were detectable until 5min of cardiac arrest and subsequent CPR. According to our experiments, the suggestion of 10min of cardiac arrest being equivalent to brain death exceeds the minimum time after which clinical and electrophysiological criteria of brain death are fulfilled. Therefore shorter "no-touch" times might be ethically acceptable to reduce warm ischemia time.

Donation after cardiocirculatory death: a call for a moratorium pending full public disclosure and fully informed consent

Many believe that the ethical problems of donation after cardiocirculatory death (DCD) have been "worked out" and that it is unclear why DCD should be resisted. In this paper we will argue that DCD donors may not yet be dead, and therefore that organ donation during DCD may violate the dead donor rule. We first present a description of the process of DCD and the standard ethical rationale for the practice. We then present our concerns with DCD, including the following: irreversibility of absent circulation has not occurred and the many attempts to claim it has have all failed; conflicts of interest at all steps in the DCD process, including the decision to withdraw life support before DCD, are simply unavoidable; potentially harmful premortem interventions to preserve organ utility are not justifiable, even with the help of the principle of double effect; claims that DCD conforms with the intent of the law and current accepted medical standards are misleading and inaccurate; and consensus statements by respected medical groups do not change these arguments due to their low quality including being plagued by conflict of interest. Moreover, some arguments in favor of DCD, while likely true, are "straw-man arguments," such as the great benefit of organ donation. The truth is that honesty and trustworthiness require that we face these problems instead of avoiding them. We believe that DCD is not ethically allowable because it abandons the dead donor rule, has unavoidable conflicts of interests, and implements premortem interventions which can hasten death. These important points have not been, but need to be fully disclosed to the public and incorporated into fully informed consent. These are tall orders, and require open public debate. Until this debate occurs, we call for a moratorium on the practice of DCD.

Survey of pediatricians' opinions on donation after cardiac death: are the donors dead?

OBJECTIVE

There has been debate in the ethics literature as to whether the donation-after-cardiac-death donor is dead after 5 minutes of absent circulation. We set out to determine whether pediatricians consider the donation-after-cardiac-death donor as dead.

METHODS

A survey was mailed to all 147 pediatricians who are affiliated with the university teaching children's hospital. The survey had 4 pediatric patient scenarios in which a decision was made to donate organs after 5 minutes of absent circulation. Background information described the organ shortage, and the debate about the term "irreversibility" applied to death in donation after cardiac death. Descriptive statistics were used, with responses between groups compared by using the chi(2) statistic.

RESULTS

The response rate was 54% (80 of 147). In each scenario, when given a patient described as dead with absent circulation for 5 minutes, <or=60% of respondents strongly agreed/agreed that the patient is definitely dead, <or=50% responded that the patient is in the state called "dead," and <or=56% strongly agreed/agreed that the physicians are being truthful when calling the patient dead. On at least 1 of the scenarios, 38 (48%) of 147 responded uncertain, disagree, or strongly disagree that the patient is definitely dead. Although the patients in the 4 scenarios were in the identical physiologic state, with absent circulation for 5 minutes, 12 (15%) of 80 respondents did not consistently consider the patients in the state called "dead" between scenarios. Fewer than 5% of respondents answered strongly agree/agree to allow donation after cardiac death while also answering disagree/strongly disagree that the patient is definitely dead, suggesting little support to abandon the dead-donor rule.

CONCLUSIONS

Most pediatrician respondents were not confident that a donation-after-cardiac-death donor was dead. This suggests that additional debate about the concept of irreversibility applied to donation after cardiac death is needed.

Organ Procurement After Cardiocirculatory Death: A Critical Analysis

To shorten the transplantation waiting time in the United States, federal regulations have been introduced requiring hospitals to develop policies for organ donation after cardiac (or circulatory) death (DCD). The practice of DCD is invoked based on the validity of the University of Pittsburgh Medical Center (UPMC) protocol and relies on the accuracy of the University of Wisconsin (UW) evaluation tool to appropriately identify organ donors. There is little evidence to support the position that the criteria for organ procurement adopted from the UPMC protocol complies with the dead donor rule. A high false-positive rate of the UW evaluation tool can expose many dying patients to unnecessary perimortem interventions because of donation failure. The medications and/or interventions for the sole purpose of maintaining organ viability can have unintended negative consequences on the timing and quality of end-of-life care offered to organ donors. It is essential to address and manage the evolving conflict between optimal end-of-life care and the necessary sacrifices for the procurement of transplantable organs from the terminally ill. The recipients of marginal organs recovered from DCD can also suffer higher mortality and morbidity than recipients of other types of donated organs. Finally, transparent disclosure to the public of the risks involved to both organ donors and recipients may contribute to open societal debate on the ethical acceptability of DCD.

Understanding the antecedents of the acceptance of donation after cardiac death by healthcare professionals

OBJECTIVE

A 3-yr study funded by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services was conducted to identify potential barriers to and opportunities for increasing the number hospitals with donation after cardiac death (DCD) protocols, the support of DCD by individuals involved in the donation request process, and the number DCD donors recovered. This study reports the qualitative findings.

DESIGN

Methods used included an advisory committee and an extensive array of key informant interviews and focus groups.

SETTING

Hospitals and telephone contact.

SUBJECTS

Discussions with nurses, physicians, social service staff, clergy, administrators, and organ procurement organization staff. A total of 216 people participated.

INTERVENTIONS

Collection and analysis of information regarding perceptions of DCD, potential barriers and opportunities, and strategies for gaining support.

MEASUREMENT AND MAIN RESULTS

Key barriers included a lack of knowledge about DCD, psychological barriers for DCD vs. brain death, concerns about whether death has been reached, saving vs. killing patients, trust in the organ procurement organization, moving from saving patients to being a donation advocate, and concerns with the DCD process. Opportunities included education initiatives, well-trained requesters, a cultural shift, a consistent DCD protocol separating care from recovery, process monitoring, and a strong sense of teamwork.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings provide a better understanding of healthcare professionals' knowledge, attitudes, and behaviors regarding DCD. Understanding these issues is critical to the implementation of strategic plans for DCD programs. One of the biggest barriers to overcome is a lack of knowledge of DCD, which leads to misperceptions, which in turn contribute to negative attitudes and/or discomfort by healthcare professionals. Communication efforts that are able to educate healthcare professionals and eliminate misperceptions will increase support for DCD. Key to future success requires confident and well-trained DCD requesters.

"Non-heart-beating," or "cardiac death," organ donation: why we should care

BACKGROUND

Organ donation after cessation of cardiac pump activity is referred to as non-heart-beating organ donation (NHBOD). NHBOD donors can be neurologically intact; they do not fulfill the brain death criteria prior to cessation of cardiac pump activity. For hospitals to participate in NHBOD, they must comply with a newly introduced federal requirement for ICU patients whose deaths are considered imminent after withdrawal of life support. This report describes issues related to NHBOD.

METHODS

A nonstructured review of selected publications and Web sites was undertaken.

RESULTS

Scientific evidence from autoresuscitation and extracorporeal perfusion suggests that verifying cardiorespiratory arrest lasting 2-5 minutes does not uniformly comply with the dead donor rule, so that the process of organ procurement can be the irreversible event defining death in organ donors. The interest of organ procurement organizations and affiliates in maximizing recovery of transplantable organs introduces self-serving bias in gaining consent for organ donation and abandons the basic tenet of obtaining true informed consent. The impact of donor management and procurement protocols on end-of-life (EOL) care and the potential trade-off are not disclosed, raising concern about whether potential donors and their families are fully informed before consenting to donation.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of comprehensive quality indicators for EOL care can determine the impact of NHBOD on care offered to donors and the effects on families and health care providers. Detailed evaluation of NHBOD will enable the public to make informed decisions about participating in this type of organ donation.

Ethics review: dark angels--the problem of death in intensive care

Critical care medicine has expanded the envelope of debilitating disease through the application of an aggressive and invasive care plan, part of which is designed to identify and reverse organ dysfunction before it proceeds to organ failure. For a select patient population, this care plan has been remarkably successful. But because patient selection is very broad, critical care sometimes yields amalgams of life in death: the state of being unable to participate in human life, unable to die, at least in the traditional sense. This work examines the emerging paradox of somatic versus brain death and why it matters to medical science.

Intensive care in Australia and New Zealand

This article provides an up-to-date account of intensive care in Australia and New Zealand. Overall, intensive care medicine in Australia and New Zealand is in a healthy state. It began early and has developed into a distinct and strong medical specialty. There are well-developed organizations dealing with all aspects of the specialty. The ICU is recognized as an expensive and limited resource. Overall, intensivists in these two countries have good control of it and have learned to use it wisely.