[hocndoc]

I understand who the authors are and see the logical fallicy in the following two sentences:

""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."

Although at this late hour I can't remember the formal name for this error, the fact that brain cells die before the heart cells and that we transplant hearts from brain-dead donors does not mean that the justification for the ethical and legal history of the concept of "brain death" is organ transplantation.

[MarMema]

does not mean that the justification for the ethical and legal history of the concept of "brain death" is organ transplantation.

Well said. But what else can be driving the push to re- define death, expand PVS dx to include all inconvenient family members, and completely (it seems to me) abandon all previous efforts/research in rehab of brain-damaged people.

[MarMema]

This makes the case I was unable to make well in my post #46.