When Brain Death Belies Belief
The case of Jahi McMath has reignited a discussion concerning how society should define death. Despite pronouncing McMath brain dead based on the American Academy of Neurology criteria, the court ordered continued mechanical ventilation to accommodate the family’s religious beliefs. Recent case law...
| Auteurs: | ; |
|---|---|
| Collaborateurs: | |
| Type de support: | Électronique Article |
| Langue: | Anglais |
| Vérifier la disponibilité: | HBZ Gateway |
| Journals Online & Print: | En cours de chargement...
|
| Fernleihe: | Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste |
| Publié: |
Springer Science + Business Media B. V.
[2016]
|
| Dans: |
Journal of religion and health
Année: 2016, Volume: 55, Numéro: 6, Pages: 2199-2213 |
| Sujets non-standardisés: | B
Brain Death
B Uniform Determination of Death Act B free exercise clause B Jahi McMath B Religious Freedom |
| Accès en ligne: |
Volltext (Verlag) Volltext (doi) |
| Résumé: | The case of Jahi McMath has reignited a discussion concerning how society should define death. Despite pronouncing McMath brain dead based on the American Academy of Neurology criteria, the court ordered continued mechanical ventilation to accommodate the family’s religious beliefs. Recent case law suggests that the potential for a successful challenge to the neurologic criteria of death provisions of the Uniform Determination of Death Act are greater than ever in the majority of states that have passed religious freedom legislation. As well, because standard ethical claims regarding brain death are either patently untrue or subject to legitimate dispute, those whose beliefs do not comport with the brain death standard should be able to reject it. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 1573-6571 |
| Contient: | Enthalten in: Journal of religion and health
|
| Persistent identifiers: | DOI: 10.1007/s10943-016-0298-4 |