PubMed Health⌕ Search

PubMed · 10935263

[Cerebral death and bioethics].

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: Brain death has been a topic of great interest for clinicians throughout the history of Neurosciences. There are so many different ideas about this topic that it has been necessary to constantly define further the criteria and medical decisions applicable in this field. Also about this matter there are a set of cultural, philosophical and religious aspects as well as autonomous principles in the people involved in such an event. Questions and dilemmas are still present in the individuality of every case and especially in terms of management of information and circumstances that define brain death. DEVELOPMENT: This essay tries to analyze the medical and historical issues around death and its relation to the context of brain death as such. There are also a series of reflections supported by the current bioethical thoughts that are identified with a cultural framework that is crucial to acknowledge the way in which the doctor, the family and society approach an event such as brain death. In spite of all the development of diagnostic technology and the extremes of the futility and extreme cruelty of treatments; there are still open questions that require to be looked into with objective criteria and scientific rigor. CONCLUSION: We should not put aside bioethical principles that are inherent to human quality and dignity that touch the sensitivity of those who give out the information and those who receive it within this process of interaction between the medical staff and the family.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

R Ramos-Zúñiga. [Cerebral death and bioethics].. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/10935263/

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

High hopes and automatic escalators: a critique of some new arguments in bioethics.

Two protechnology arguments, the "hopeful principle" and the "automatic escalator", often used in bioethics, are identified and critically analysed in this paper. It is shown that the hopeful principle is closely related to the problematic precautionary principle, and the automatic escalator argument has close affinities to the often criticised empirical slippery slope argument. The hopeful principle is shown to be really hopeless as an argument, and automatic escalator arguments often lead nowhere when critically analysed. These arguments should therefore only be used with great caution.

Bioethics↗