Open Access
Does the Uniform Determination of Death Act Need to Be Revised?
Author(s) -
Doyen Nguyen
Publication year - 2020
Publication title -
linacre quarterly/the linacre quarterly
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.148
H-Index - 9
eISSN - 2050-8549
pISSN - 0024-3639
DOI - 10.1177/0024363920926018
Subject(s) - declaration , status quo , root cause , law , order (exchange) , psychology , medicine , sociology , political science , business , finance , reliability engineering , engineering
Prompted by concerns raised by the rise in litigations, which challenge the legal status of brain death (BD), Lewis and colleagues recently proposed a revision of the Uniform Determination of Death Act (UDDA). The revision consists of (i) narrowing down the definition of BD to the loss of specific brain functions, namely those functions that can be assessed on bedside neurological examination; (ii) requiring that the determination of BD must be in accordance with the specific guidelines designated in the revision; and (iii) eliminating the necessity for obtaining consent prior to performing the tests for BD determination. By analyzing Lewis and colleagues' revision, this article shows that this revision is fraught with difficulties. Therefore, this article also proposes two approaches for an ethical revision of the UDDA; the first is in accordance with scientific realism and Christian anthropology, while the second is grounded in trust and respect for persons. If the UDDA is to be revised, then it should be based on sound ethical principles in order to resolve the ongoing BD controversies and rebuild public trust.