The Case for Pluralism in Death Determination: From Empirical Data to a Policy Proposal

The article defends the pluralist policy of death determination. According to this view, competent persons should be free to choose the criteria under which they should be diagnosed as dead. Our argument partly relies on the diagnosis of the current state of the discussion in the bioethical literature on death determination and partly on empirical evidence that lay intuitions about death determination differ, that is, that there is interpersonal psychological pluralism about death determination. The article then introduces empirical evidence for intrapersonal psychological pluralism about death determination. We argue that intrapersonal psychological pluralism strengthens the case for the pluralist policy of death determination.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy A Forum for Bioethics and Philosophy of Medicine
Published
2025-08-09
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1093/jmp/jhaf028
Primary Topic
Organ Donation and Transplantation
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

The Case for Pluralism in Death Determination: From Empirical Data to a Policy Proposal

Ivars Neiders, Vilius Dranseika
The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy A Forum for Bioethics and Philosophy of Medicine
Organ Donation and Transplantation
article

The Case for Pluralism in Death Determination: From Empirical Data to a Policy Proposal

Ivars Neiders, Vilius Dranseika
article en

Abstract

The article defends the pluralist policy of death determination. According to this view, competent persons should be free to choose the criteria under which they should be diagnosed as dead. Our argument partly relies on the diagnosis of the current state of the discussion in the bioethical literature on death determination and partly on empirical evidence that lay intuitions about death determination differ, that is, that there is interpersonal psychological pluralism about death determination. The article then introduces empirical evidence for intrapersonal psychological pluralism about death determination. We argue that intrapersonal psychological pluralism strengthens the case for the pluralist policy of death determination.

The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy A Forum for Bioethics and Philosophy of MedicineVol. 51(1)
Jagiellonian University (PL), University of Latvia (LV)
Openalex Percentile: Top 59%
Organ Donation and Transplantation
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.