Uncategorized

PRO-LIFE BASICS: Why do you suggest that support for the notion of “brain death” helps the organ transplant industry, and why should the public be wary of it?

Ever since the “Harvard criteria” were formulated (1968), which established “brain death” as actual death of a patient, a debate has raged not only within the medical community but among Catholic bioethicists as well. The reason for that debate is reflected in my position, which is this: When the surgical removal of a vital unpaired organ results in the death of the organ donor, the practice is evil, because killing is the methodology.

Patients who are declared “brain-dead” are frequently viewed as suitable organ donors. However, they are human beings who are alive, not dead (see the Viewpoint article in this issue). And when a vital unpaired organ is donated, the donor dies. There is no difference between starving and dehydrating a patient to death, as in the case of Terri Schiavo, and robbing a patient of his heart. In either situation, the patient dies.

Organ transplantation is an industry involving a great deal of money and, sadly, not a whole lot of natural-law ethics. Thus, famed pediatric neurologist Alan Shewmon, M.D., a former supporter of brain-death criteria, revealed the following in the February 1997 Linacre Quarterly:

[T]here is a serious issue of informed consent. Most signers of organ donor cards and families authorizing donation have very little understanding of “brain death” and of what actually happens in operating rooms. Where they read the phrase “after my death,” many imagine a pulseless corpse and might be horrified to learn that it really means “after I become comatose and apnoeic (cannot breathe), but all my other organs are working fine, I will be eviscerated while still pink and warm, with my heart still spontaneously beating and blood circulating.” However, no one is informed that the rationale for equating “brain death” with death remains controversial and that empirical evidence has been accumulating that casts serious doubt on the mainstream rationale. Thus, information highly relevant for the potential donor’s moral decision making is systematically withheld.

This fact alone should discourage potential organ donors and/or their representatives from signing any agreements.The cost of not being fully informed could ultimately be the patient’s life. Let the donor beware!

Facebook Comments

About the author

Judie Brown

Judie Brown is president of American Life League and served 15 years as a member of the Pontifical Academy for Life.