"Brain Dead" Man Recovers Before Doctors Can Take His Organs | LifeNews.com

"Brain Dead" Man Recovers Before Doctors Can Take His Organs | LifeNews.com

Please take the time to read the story at the link, above.  I have been warning about this for a number of years.  Organ donation is a sensitive subject. I have complete sympathy for those who need organs, but no one should be required to die in order to provide their organs for another person. It must be remembered that the person who is to become a donor of unpaired vital organs must certainly be dead before the removal of the organs.  Perhaps infrequently, but often enough for concern, individuals declared brain dead are not dead and can make significant recoveries. The reasons for this are misdiagnosis, failure to rigorously apply the criteria for brain death, or there is something wrong with the concept of brain death altogether.  My personal opinion is that we do not know enough about this and that advances in the "science" of defining death will eventually result in further clarification of the morality of organ donation.  Criteria for cardiac death, these days, can be a cause for concern, as well.  A person who is not "brain dead" can be removed from a respirator if he or she has a living will or other advance medical directive and, then, organs can be removed.  The argument is that such persons are dead because their heart stops beating for a brief period of time.  However, after this brief time, they are immediately restored to the respirator as their body is being prepped for organ harvesting.  In such cases, the harvesting is often done with anesthesia because the person's body reacts to the injuries of the surgery.

I have been saying this for a long time...

From Bioedge: Doctors Call for Moratorium on Organ Donation after Cardiac Death

Organ Donation after Cardiac Death (DCD), formerly known as the non-heart beating donation protocol (NHBD) is a misused and deadly form of organ donation. When I was an editorial writer for the St. Louis Review, the Review published an editorial calling for a moratorium on donations following this protocol.  It was criticized by some so-called bioethicists and some who claimed to be Catholic moralists.  Still, to be honest, it remains a questionable practice.  It is interesting that this group of doctors now is calling for the same.

The fact of the matter is that there are doctors on the other side of the issue who argue that we should abandon the dead donor rule for the same reasons that these doctors say that there should be a moratorium on this practice, that is, that the intended donors are not dead.  I think it is embarrassing that those who claim to support organ donation will not deal the practical side of the dead donor rule.  Why stick one's head in the sand?  Isn't it best to get this out in the open?  If you claim to support ethical organ donation, why not allow an open an honest discussion? Why not support full disclosure to potential organ donors?  Shouldn't potential donors know that when the decision is made to take their organs that they, the donors, might not be dead?