1. Inconsistency between the Circulatory and the Brain Criteria of Death in the Uniform Determination of Death Act

Inconsistency between the Circulatory and the Brain Criteria of Death in the Uniform Determination of Death Act

Download here 

Average read time: 25 to 30 minutes

Short Summary of the Article:

The article, “Inconsistency between the Circulatory and the Brain Criteria of Death in the Uniform Determination of Death Act (UDDA),” explores the ethical and conceptual inconsistencies within the criteria used to determine death in the U.S. under the UDDA. The authors argue that the circulatory-respiratory and brain death criteria are based on different interpretations of the concept of “cessation of functions,” leading to confusion. They suggest that these conflicting interpretations undermine the consistency and integrity of the legal definition of death. The article discusses potential ways to resolve these inconsistencies, such as adopting a single, coherent criterion of death or redefining the concept of death itself to align with current medical practices and technologies.

Learning Outcomes 

Upon completion of this activity, you should have an understanding of:

1. The ethical and conceptual inconsistencies between the circulatory-respiratory and brain criteria of death, and how these inconsistencies affect medical practice and end-of-life decision-making.
2. The potential consequences of applying a single, coherent criterion for death, which could result in significant changes to legal, medical, and ethical approaches to end-of-life care.
3. The need for reform in the legal definition of death, especially in light of advancements in medical technology that can artificially sustain circulatory, respiratory, and even neurological functions.