Addressing the Problem of Brain Death Misdiagnosis: A ‘Just’ Evaluation of a Difficult Problem

Abstract In their article, Drabiak et al. review the state laws and ethical debates related to the determination of death by neurologic criteria, analyze the recent 2023 American Academy of Neurology practice guidelines, and make policy recommendations. We call this review ‘just’ because the article correctly focuses on the chief ethical, legal, and medical issue in this debate — namely whether patients declared dead by neurological criteria are actually dead, along with the need to improve integrity, honesty, trust, and residency education and training to reduce moral distress and achieve moral certainty in declaring patients dead, initiating organ procurement, and communicating these realities to patient families/surrogates. As the authors invite the reader to comprehend, it should no longer be considered a minority or fringe opinion that determinations of brain death are rife with false positives, inadvertent misdiagnoses, violations of informed consent, and, ultimately, dissent from the law. For the sake of justice, one would do well to heed these words.

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
The Journal of Law Medicine & Ethics
Published
2025-01-01
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1017/jme.2025.10108
Citations
1
Primary Topic
Diverse Scientific and Economic Studies
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
3.13
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Addressing the Problem of Brain Death Misdiagnosis: A ‘Just’ Evaluation of a Difficult Problem

1 citations
The Journal of Law Medicine & Ethics
Diverse Scientific and Economic Studies
3.13
article

Addressing the Problem of Brain Death Misdiagnosis: A ‘Just’ Evaluation of a Difficult Problem

article en
1 citations

Abstract

Abstract In their article, Drabiak et al. review the state laws and ethical debates related to the determination of death by neurologic criteria, analyze the recent 2023 American Academy of Neurology practice guidelines, and make policy recommendations. We call this review ‘just’ because the article correctly focuses on the chief ethical, legal, and medical issue in this debate — namely whether patients declared dead by neurological criteria are actually dead, along with the need to improve integrity, honesty, trust, and residency education and training to reduce moral distress and achieve moral certainty in declaring patients dead, initiating organ procurement, and communicating these realities to patient families/surrogates. As the authors invite the reader to comprehend, it should no longer be considered a minority or fringe opinion that determinations of brain death are rife with false positives, inadvertent misdiagnoses, violations of informed consent, and, ultimately, dissent from the law. For the sake of justice, one would do well to heed these words.

The Journal of Law Medicine & EthicsVol. 53(2)
Essentia Health (US), Georgetown University (US), University of North Dakota (US), OSF Saint Francis Medical Center (US)
Peace, Justice and strong institutions
Openalex Percentile: Top 6%
Diverse Scientific and Economic Studies
3.13
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.