PubMed · 5419830
The source did not provide an abstract. Follow the original record for more information.
Explore connections, maps & timelines
R D Hesch. 1970-06-05. [Hypertonology].. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/5419830/
Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.
KEEP EXPLORING
Within the framework of the planned law concerning the removal and transfer of organs (transplantation law) in the Federal Republic of Germany, and taking as a basis the draft of a prototype law by the federal states dated February 1st 1994 and the draft bill of the states of Bremen and Hessen dated June 30th 1994, the speech addresses itself primarily to the question of whether, when no consent of the decreased can be identified, and when the next-of-kin have been informed by the doctor in attendance and given an appropriate time-limit, the next-of-kin in order of succession or any close relative can object to organ removal for the purpose of transplant surgery. Because of the highly personal nature of the postmortal personal rights transferred to the next-of-kin as well as their custodial rights, and with regard to the particularly sensitive nature of this decision, it is suggested that the next-of-kin be informed not only of their right of refusal but also-in view of their responsibility toward other relatives-be instructed on the meaning, substance and legal consequences of such a refusal. It is furthermore suggested that sufficient organs could be obtained by organisational measures such as requests to driving licence applicants, which would lead to a higher preparedness to donate organs, while, at the same time, sparing the next-of-kin unnecessary emotional pain. From a medical point of view, it should be recognised that the complete and irreversible loss of all brain functions, in spite of artificially maintained heart and circulatory functions, is a sure sign of death. In closing, it is pointed out that a change to the currently valid [symbol: see text] 168 StGB would mean that a violation of the right of refusal could lead to criminal prosecution.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
1. In Germany health protection against injuries at work is distinctly separated from the general health care of the population. 2. Health protection at work includes: recognition, prevention, treatment and rehabilitation connected with occupational diseases as well as prevention of accidents at work. The total cost of this system including accident indemnities is covered by the employer. 3. The system of health care and safety at work within the enterprise comprises a coordinated activity of the physician inspector and a representative of the enterprise and the owner. 4. In big enterprises there is another system operating parallel to the one mentioned above: this system provide comprehensive health care. The costs are covered by contributions both on the paid of the employers and the employees.