[脑死亡真的是死亡吗?]

Diskussionsforum medizinische Ethik Pub Date : 1990-10-01
J Seifert
{"title":"[脑死亡真的是死亡吗?]","authors":"J Seifert","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The paper rejects \"brain death\" as a new criterion, or definition, of actual death. The main theses are two: 1. Brain death as such--in any of its meanings--is not man's death and this can be proven by means of many cogent and some plausible arguments. 2. Even if the theoretical arguments against the identification of man's actual death with brain death did not demonstrate their non-identity, the opposite position would still be uncertain, at least. In view of this undeniable fact, a minimal ethical responsibility demands that we must not act, by organ retrievals, on the assumption of the identity of \"brain death\"--in any of its meanings--with man's actual death. We must avoid those actions which, like killing, presuppose a high degree of moral certainty concerning death, given that we cannot attain such certainty, as in the case of brain death. Thus organ and heart-explantations are found to be unethical. A newly thought out notion of biological death of the human organism as a whole (\"clinical death\" as irreversible cessation of all vital bodily functions, in particular of cardiopulmonary and cerebral functions) is proposed as theoretically best founded and ethically safest medical criterion of death.</p>","PeriodicalId":77110,"journal":{"name":"Diskussionsforum medizinische Ethik","volume":" 4","pages":"4 p. preceding 503"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1990-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"[Is brain death actually death?].\",\"authors\":\"J Seifert\",\"doi\":\"\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>The paper rejects \\\"brain death\\\" as a new criterion, or definition, of actual death. The main theses are two: 1. Brain death as such--in any of its meanings--is not man's death and this can be proven by means of many cogent and some plausible arguments. 2. Even if the theoretical arguments against the identification of man's actual death with brain death did not demonstrate their non-identity, the opposite position would still be uncertain, at least. In view of this undeniable fact, a minimal ethical responsibility demands that we must not act, by organ retrievals, on the assumption of the identity of \\\"brain death\\\"--in any of its meanings--with man's actual death. We must avoid those actions which, like killing, presuppose a high degree of moral certainty concerning death, given that we cannot attain such certainty, as in the case of brain death. Thus organ and heart-explantations are found to be unethical. A newly thought out notion of biological death of the human organism as a whole (\\\"clinical death\\\" as irreversible cessation of all vital bodily functions, in particular of cardiopulmonary and cerebral functions) is proposed as theoretically best founded and ethically safest medical criterion of death.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":77110,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Diskussionsforum medizinische Ethik\",\"volume\":\" 4\",\"pages\":\"4 p. preceding 503\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"1990-10-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Diskussionsforum medizinische Ethik\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Diskussionsforum medizinische Ethik","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

该报告拒绝将“脑死亡”作为实际死亡的新标准或定义。主要论点有两点:1。脑死亡本身——无论在任何意义上——都不是人的死亡,这一点可以通过许多令人信服和一些似是而非的论点来证明。2. 即使反对将人的实际死亡等同于脑死亡的理论论据不能证明它们的非同一性,至少相反的立场仍然是不确定的。鉴于这一不可否认的事实,最低限度的道德责任要求,我们绝不能在器官提取的过程中,假定"脑死亡"——无论其含义如何——等同于人的实际死亡。我们必须避免那些行为,比如杀戮,预先假定对死亡有高度的道德确定性,因为我们无法达到这种确定性,比如脑死亡。因此,器官和心脏的解释被认为是不道德的。提出了一种新提出的人类有机体作为一个整体的生物死亡概念("临床死亡"是所有重要身体功能,特别是心肺和脑功能的不可逆转的停止),作为理论上最有根据和道德上最安全的死亡医学标准。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
[Is brain death actually death?].

The paper rejects "brain death" as a new criterion, or definition, of actual death. The main theses are two: 1. Brain death as such--in any of its meanings--is not man's death and this can be proven by means of many cogent and some plausible arguments. 2. Even if the theoretical arguments against the identification of man's actual death with brain death did not demonstrate their non-identity, the opposite position would still be uncertain, at least. In view of this undeniable fact, a minimal ethical responsibility demands that we must not act, by organ retrievals, on the assumption of the identity of "brain death"--in any of its meanings--with man's actual death. We must avoid those actions which, like killing, presuppose a high degree of moral certainty concerning death, given that we cannot attain such certainty, as in the case of brain death. Thus organ and heart-explantations are found to be unethical. A newly thought out notion of biological death of the human organism as a whole ("clinical death" as irreversible cessation of all vital bodily functions, in particular of cardiopulmonary and cerebral functions) is proposed as theoretically best founded and ethically safest medical criterion of death.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
[Brief definitions of concepts in medical ethics. 33. Assisted suicide--the problem of the "double effect"]. [Restriction of ethics in medicine]. [Somatic gene therapy--aspects from theological discussion]. [The human embryo as a teleologically defined entity]. [Bioethics in Hong Kong--between morals and economics].
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1