The distinction between life and death largely relies on the current definitions of life and death. Illogically, there seems to be less disagreement about the definition of death, while the definition of life remains controversial. In a legally perfect world, the factors considered for declaration of death would be the same factors considered to define life, however, that does not appear to be the case. While the current definitions of death are fairly consistent but not free of conflict, the definition of life remains controversial. According to the Pittsburg Protocol, death is currently defined as the irreversible cessation of neurological or cardiopulmonary function.1 More specifically, brain death is defined as the irreversible cessation of the entire brain (including the brain stem), and cardiac death is defined as irreversible cessation of circulatory and respiratory functions.1 Even though the definitions seem clearly defined, issues have developed in regards to the amount of time allotted before declaration of death after cardiac arrest and regarding the possibility of resuscitation. The University of Pittsburgh Medical Center uses a protocol for cardiopulmonary death in which they declare the patient dead after two minutes of cardiac arrest.1 This has become controversial because some critics argue patients could be resuscitated at the two minute mark, therefore the patients have not experienced irreversible loss of function and are not truly dead.1 In the event of organ donors, this violates the dead donor rule, which states that the patient must be dead in order to harvest organs.1 However, their council’s rebuttal states that ethically a patient has irreversibly lost function if the patient wishes to be free from life... ... middle of paper ... ...le, after 24 weeks of gestational age, physicians recommend against termination of the pregnancy.4 While there have been attempts to define the beginning of life, it remains a controversial topic. As was discussed, death is defined as the irreversible cessation of cardiopulmonary or brain function, yet there are still critics who argue against cardiopulmonary death parameters (the two minute rule), and question the possibility of resuscitation and how that can be considered death. Furthermore, critics argued against the complete loss of brain function as a definitive characteristic of death while rebuttals revealed personhood as too ambiguous to define death. Aside from death, there was no definition of life, but controversies between philosophical, theological, and scientific viewpoints on when life begins and when moral status can be given to a being were explored.
As a result, life-sustaining procedures such as ventilators, feeding tubes, and treatments for infectious and terminal diseases are developing. While these life-sustaining methods have positively influenced modern medicine, they also inadvertently cause terminal patients extensive pain and suffering. Previous to the development of life-sustaining procedures, many people died in the care of their own home, however, today the majority of Americans take their last breath lying in a hospital bed. As the advancement of modern medicine continues, physicians and patients are going to encounter life-altering trials and tribulations. Arguably, the most controversial debate in modern medicine is the discussion of the ethical choice for physician-assisted suicide.
According to Gamliel (2012), euthanasia refers to actions or omissions that result in the death of a person who is already gravely ill. Techniques of active euthanasia range fro...
The Harvard Criteria is defined as followed; if a person is unreceptive and unresponsive, there is no movement and no spontaneous respiration or other spontaneous muscular movement, no reflexes, a flat EEG, and lastly no circulation to or within the brain. Kastenbaum explains that there is different type of conditions that might make a patient nonresponsive. Which “several of these conditions could be mistaken for brain death by uninformed observers (Kastanbuam, 45). Some of the conditions that Kastenbaum talks about are akinetic mutism, catatonia, coma, or the locked-in sydrome. He explains that these conditions are different and that one similarity they all have in common is an “impression of terminal no responsiveness. By contrast, we might be impressed by the nonpurposive reflexes and grimaces of a person in a persistent or permanent vegetative state and thereby persuade ourselves that the person is still there (Kastanbaum, 45). If we follow the traditional determination of death, and compare it with the Harvard Criteria we notice that in order to determine if a person is dead they would not display any signs of being alive. If patient are showing signs of being alive why wouldn’t physicians consider that. It does not mean that because they are nonresponsive that they are brain dead especially if they are displaying signs of being alive. Kastabum states that it is a “harrowing similarity to being buried alive” (Kastabum, 45). A person can be brain dead but does not mean they are dead, the person that make the decisions on their ending of life should really look more deeper into seeing if the patient is completely gone, but displaying signs of being alive means you are alive disregarding of what a physician might
There will always be a debate over whether or not abortion should be a legal option. It continues to divide Americans very long after the US Supreme Court’s decision on Roe v. Wade. People, identifying themselves as pro-choice, say that choosing abortion is a right that should not be limited by the government or religious authority, and it outweighs any right claimed for a fetus or an embryo. It is said that pregnant women will resort to unsafe, illegal abortions if they do not get the option to do it the safer way, legally. Their opponents, identifying themselves as pro-life, say that a life begins at conception, and so abortion is the immoral killing of an innocent, helpless human being. They say
The criteria or definition of brain death was re-examined in 1968 by a committee at Harvard Medical School and is part of the criteria used today. They defined it as when a patient; is unresponsive to stimulus; cannot move or breathe without the aid of a ventilator and has no brain stem reflexes. Several tests are done in order to determine if a patient meets these criteria and this can be done by physicians and neurologists. A brain dead patient is legally dead and a death cer...
Philosophers like Peter Singer and Margaret Battin have dedicated their personal and professional time to evaluating the choice to which a person has the right to continue to live or to die. In order to do this, we first have to examine what exactly euthanasia is. The practice of euthanasia can be classified in two different ways. First, euthanasia can be either active or passive. Active euthanasia involves the direct interruption of ongoing daily functioning that otherwise would be adequate to maintain life. Passive euthanasia involves the withholding or withdrawing of treatment that might support ongoing daily functions; without drugs or treatment the body would continue its process of shutting down. In the case of passive euthanasia, the argument can be made that the treatment is actually withholding the natural process of death. Secondly, euthanasia can be divided into three categories based on a level of consciousness: involuntary (death against ones wishes), voluntary (death based on expressed wishes), and non-voluntary (incapable of consent or competent decision-making).
There are many legal aspects that go into declaring what is and what is not brain death. In today’s society, many people, including medical professionals, judges and attorneys struggle to identify what exactly constitutes as brain death. According to, Smith“ the concept of brain death came about during the 1950’s when, as a consequence of developments in critical care, clinicians were faced for the first time with the prospect of an apparently ‘alive’ patient sustained by mechanical ventilation long after brain function had ceased”(Smith, 2011).
However, despite the support that this right to die movement had gained, there was opposition as states like California, Michigan, and Maine rejected it. The divided opinions of the nation then lead to the controversial question: Should terminally ill patients have the right to choose to die? However, with religion aside, the answer leans towards “yes.” Terminally ill patients should have the righ...
The debate over whose decision it is to uphold a human life is one with a vast range of opinions. Some believe it should be up to God, whereas others assert that it is the right of an individual; however, the ultimate verdict rests in the hands of the government. When tragedy leaves a victim in critical condition with no assurance of recovery, circumstances do not allow for a straightforward action plan. In any state of affairs, it is optimal to continue the life of a patient, even if it seems as though the ideal solution is death. Medical practitioners, relatives, and patients themselves do not deserve the pressure to decide this grave fate. The choice between life and death should not exist. Every human is entitled to the right to live, and
Death is vaguely defined, therefore causing misleading judgment within the court, physicians, and guardians. It has to be more scientifically accurate such “as the irreversible loss of higher brain function” (Munson, 2013). An example of this is the case of Karen Quinlan; in 1975 Karen Quinlan mysteriously entered a persistent vegetative state (PVS), where the brain of the person is sometimes mentally aware but sometimes it is not and the body of individual reminds inactive. She was in this state for ten years, ten years of medical resources. Even when the parents said to euthanize her, the court would not accept this request since Karen was considered at the age of consent, which was disrupting her autonomy. Karen was considered also brain-dead and there was no activity of higher brain function just electrical activity (Munson, 2013). Even physicians agreed with Karen being brain-dead, but the court did not allow her life support to be removed because she was considered to be alive. Therefore, the paternalistic action of removing the life support should have trumped the decision of the court to keep Karen alive. The court did not recognize Karen being dead and even if she had awoken the damages would have been
A young girl undergoing a tonsillectomy at Children’s Hospital in Oakland, California, experienced blood loss and went into cardiac arrest. Jahi was originally declared brain-dead, and controversy arose, between the hospital and her family, whether to keep her alive on life support or to “pull the plug,” (Bender & Alund, 2016). Now in the case of Jahi, which is still ongoing today, it is said that she has shown signs of improvement (Shoichet, 2013). When diagnosed brain-dead, there usually is no hope for recovery, and in Jahi’s case, the state of California had printed a death certificate upon their determination of her status (Death Certificate, 2014). Jahi’s family believes there is still hope for their child and that she will wake up one day, and her signs of improvement may be proof to such hope. Keeping a patient alive on life support may be what the family wants, but also these instances can open opportunities for doctors to learn from these
President's Commission for the Study of Ethical Problems in Medicine and Biomedical and Behavioral Research. Defining Death: A Report on the Medical, Legal and Ethical Issues in the Determination of Death. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1981.
When Christians first encounter the idea of creating a spiritual discipline, some almost instantly become overwhelmed with anxiety because they must perform well for God to please Him and get to heaven. I was once one of them and to a point, I still think that way. However, the more focus on the relationship with Jesus and nothing else brings about the desires to want more in terms of spiritual growth. Desires however, do not last if disciplines are not met with a genuine commitment to maintain a fervent relationship with Jesus. For my rule of life, I will pencil in daily life disciplines that fit in the season of life that I am in currently so that God can work in me and I can become Christ like. First, I will commit fifteen minutes to daily prayer with God. Second, I will commit fifteen minutes to daily scripture reading. Third, I will commit to lead, encourage and support my wife by living out the vows that we both agreed to with God. Fourth, I will commit myself to my family in raising my two
Death is something that causes fear in many peoples lives. People will typically try to avoid the conversation of death at all cost. The word itself tends to freak people out. The thought of death is far beyond any living person’s grasp. When people that are living think about the concept of death, their minds go to many different places. Death is a thing that causes pain in peoples lives, but can also be a blessing.
As previously mentioned, there are countless paths to the attainment of Immortality. As this is an individual journey, it is up to each individual to find his own path, which may in fact not work for another person. That is why we say that Freemasonry is an individual journey. It is, of course, always helpful to have help along the way, a spiritual adviser or mentor if you will. Nevertheless, despite some guidance, no two paths are the same, just as no two bodies, etc., are the same.