Posted on 10/14/2003 7:09:32 PM PDT by MarMema
Department of Anesthesiology, Harvard Medical School,
Cambridge, MA, USA.
The "dead-donor rule" requires patients to be declared dead before the removal of life-sustaining organs for transplantation.
The concept of brain death was developed, in part, to allow patients with devastating neurologic injury to be declared dead before the occurrence of cardiopulmonary arrest. Brain death is essential to current practices of organ retrieval because it legitimates organ removal from bodies that continue to have circulation and respiration, thereby avoiding ischemic injury to the organs.
The concept of brain death has long been recognized, however, to be plagued with serious inconsistencies and contradictions. Indeed, the concept fails to correspond to any coherent biological or philosophical understanding of death.
We review the evidence and arguments that expose these problems and present an alternative ethical framework to guide the procurement of transplantable organs. This alternative is based not on brain death and the dead-donor rule, but on the ethical principles of nonmaleficence (the duty not to harm, or primum non nocere) and respect for persons.
We propose that individuals who desire to donate their organs and who are either neurologically devastated or imminently dying should be allowed to donate their organs, without first being declared dead.
Advantages of this approach are that (unlike the dead-donor rule) it focuses on the most salient ethical issues at stake, and (unlike the concept of brain death) it avoids conceptual confusion and inconsistencies.
Finally, we point out parallel developments, both domestically and abroad, that reflect both implicit and explicit support for our proposal.
I hate to sound like I need tinfoil, but have they not, perhaps, invaded the medical profession to some degree with their death culture?
Soros was clearly stating his intention to place people in medical schools in order to indoctrinate the students. IMO.
Then we see Singer teaching ethics and philosophy to the "cream of the crop" and possibly the next generation of leadership in this country.
And then I read this study that Soros and his death culture funded. It was about using hospice for chronically and terminally ill children and it was very frightening, if you read between the lines, to me.
Placing the kids in hospices instead of hospitals when they had a sickle cell crisis, for example. And I kept thinking, now why would you do that? A hospice is certainly not set up for critical care - no lab or xray to call for those middle of the night stats, and do they even code people in a hospice?
I just couldn't help thinking it was all about giving them a nice place to die instead of assisting them in staying alive. Of course the wording was heavily focused on issues like the more comforting environment of the hospice as opposed to the hospital.
Have you ever looked into the projects Soros and his Project Death in America fund?
It was fun reading some of the carefully worded letters after Cranford published his PVS study, though. I recall one letter in which the author said he or she suspected Cranford's higher death rate was due to neglect. :-)
Perhaps there is hope for academia somewhere down the road. A turnaround is badly needed.
ping
It just occurred to me that you might like to see this oldie.
Ping
One of the major reasons that man will have to be wiped from the earth by God.
Too many have become monsters and ghouls who think they are gods.
We live our lives, believing all is well, while under the table there are ghouls fast at work against the weaker humans among us.
We do have vampires and your information has proven it.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.