brain death

What if we have been getting death wrong? For decades, modern medicine has relied on the concept of brain death, the idea that when the brain irreversibly stops functioning, the person has died. But what if that is not true? In this episode, I sit down with Dr. Paul Byrne, neonatologist, Clinical Professor of Pediatrics, past president of the Catholic Medical Association, and one of the leading critics of brain death, for a conversation that challenges one of the most fundamental assumptions in modern medicine. Early in his career, Dr. Byrne encountered a patient labeled “consistent with cerebral death.” He continued treatment. That patient went on to live, marry, and have children. Since then, Dr. Byrne has spent over 40 Read More ›

My friend Bobby Schindler, the late Terri Schiavo’s brother, is one of the kindest, humblest, most decent people I know. And yet, because he dared to stand up for the inherent value of his sister’s life and against the injustice of her court-ordered dehydration — and has continued to fight on behalf of brain-injured people and their families — journalists and bioethicists often look down their noses at him as someone just beyond the pale of sophisticated society. But in a story in this Sunday’s New York Times Magazine reciting how many allegedly unconscious patients are actually aware — I refuse to use the term “vegetative” as it is a dehumanizing denigration of intrinsic human value — much to my Read More ›

What is death? It’s the moment a human being ceases to exist. But when is that exactly? We tend to think we know the answer, but what if the question is not that simple, especially when it comes to brain death? In this episode of Bioethics Babe, pediatric neurologist Dr. Christopher DeCock examines one of the most important questions in medicine, law, and bioethics: What if the medical criteria used to declare someone brain dead are not actually proving what we think they are proving? Current brain death determinations are largely based on clinical brain death criteria developed by the American Academy of Neurology, including coma, absence of brainstem reflexes, and apnea testing. But do these tests truly demonstrate the Read More ›

The “dead donor rule” is the cement that binds the public’s trust in organ transplant medicine. Under the DDR (other than in living donations, such as of one kidney) organs cannot be procured unless donors, in the words of the Munchkins, are not merely dead but really most sincerely dead.

There are two means of declaring death. Let’s call the first “heart death,” that is an irreversible cessation of all cardio/pulmonary function. The other is popularly known as “brain death,” (death declared by neurological criteria) in which function in the whole brain and each of its constituent parts have irreversibly ceased. The key word in both means of declaring death is “irreversible.”

But something appears to have gone badly off the rails in the field of procuring organs after heart death. A long New York Times expose found cases of patients who were clearly alive when organ procurement began. At the same time, a very disturbing report by the Department of Health and Human Services contained similar findings.

First, the NYT. From “A Push for More Organ Transplants Is Putting Donors at Risk”:

Last spring at a small Alabama hospital, a team of transplant surgeons prepared to cut into Misty Hawkins.…Days earlier, she had been a vibrant 42-year-old with a playful sense of humor and a love for the Thunder Beach Motorcycle Rally. But after Ms. Hawkins choked while eating and fell into a coma, her mother decided to take her off life support and donate her organs. She was removed from a ventilator and, after 103 minutes, declared dead.

A surgeon made an incision in her chest and sawed through her breastbone. That’s when the doctors discovered her heart was beating. She appeared to be breathing. They were slicing into Ms. Hawkins while she was alive.

The horror! Why are such awful things happening?