AI Article Synopsis
- The concept of death by neurologic criteria (DNC), or "brain death," was established in 1968 but remains controversial among bioethics experts, clinicians, and the public, especially in pediatric cases.
- Key points of contention include inconsistencies in the definition of DNC, debate over the clinical exam components, variations in clinical practice, and ethical issues around informed consent and justice.
- By addressing these controversies, clinicians can better support families facing decisions about DNC, providing care that is compassionate and equitable.
Article Abstract
Since the concept of death by neurologic criteria (DNC) or "brain death" was articulated by the Harvard Ad Hoc Committee in 1968, efforts to establish and uphold DNC as equivalent to biologic death have been supported through federal and state legislation, professional guidelines, and hospital policies. Despite these endeavors, DNC remains controversial among bioethics scholars and clinicians and is not universally accepted by patient families and the public. In this focused review, we outline the current points of contention surrounding the diagnosis of DNC in pediatric patients. These include physiologic, legal, and philosophical inconsistencies in the definition of DNC, controversy regarding the components of the clinical exam, variability in clinical practice, and ethical concerns regarding justice and role of informed consent. By better understanding these controversies, clinicians may serve families grappling with the diagnosis of DNC more effectively, compassionately, and equitably.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
|---|---|
| http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.spen.2023.101034 | DOI Listing |
Publication Analysis
Top Keywords
Similar Publications
Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!