Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Experiment Videos

Ethical and Legal Concerns With Nevada's Brain Death Amendments.

Greg Yanke1, Mohamed Y Rady2, Joseph L Verheijde3

  • 1School of Historical, Philosophical, and Religious Studies, Arizona State University, 975 S Myrtle Ave, Tempe, AZ, 85287, USA. Gregory.Yanke@asu.edu.

Journal of Bioethical Inquiry
|April 19, 2018
PubMed
Summary

Related Concept Videos

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Withholding therapeutic interventions in brain(stem) death: is it a self-fulfilling prophecy?

Canadian journal of anaesthesia = Journal canadien d'anesthesie·2022
Same author

Why the Revised Uniform Determination of Death Act Should Include Informed Consent and Opt-Out Option of Determination of Death by Neurologic criteria.

Neurocritical care·2022
Same author

Transparency and Education of Hospital Chaplains About Brain Death.

Neurocritical care·2021
Same author

The capacity for consciousness and the clinical diagnosis of brain death: are we using the correct gold standard?

Canadian journal of anaesthesia = Journal canadien d'anesthesie·2021
Same author

A Framework for Revisiting Brain Death: Evaluating Awareness and Attitudes Toward the Neuroscientific and Ethical Debate Around the American Academy of Neurology Brain Death Criteria.

Journal of intensive care medicine·2021
Same author

Cytomegalovirus haemorrhagic enterocolitis associated with severe infection with COVID-19.

BMJ open gastroenterology·2021

Nevada

Area of Science:

  • Neurology
  • Medical Law
  • Bioethics

Background:

  • Nevada amended its Uniform Determination of Death Act (UDDA) in 2017 to clarify neurologic criteria for death determination.
  • The amendments designate death determination as a clinical decision, not requiring familial consent, and adopt American Academy of Neurology (AAN) guidelines.
  • Physicians must withdraw life-sustaining treatment within 24 hours of a death determination, barring limited exceptions.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To evaluate the implications of Nevada's 2017 UDDA amendments regarding the determination of neurologic death.
  • To critically assess the adequacy of AAN guidelines in determining cessation of all brain functions.
  • To examine the potential conflicts between the amendments and informed consent, cultural beliefs, and constitutional law.

Main Methods:

Keywords:
Apnoea testBrain deathConstitutional lawFreedom of religionInformed consentUniform Determination of Death Act

Related Experiment Videos

  • Analysis of Nevada's amended Uniform Determination of Death Act (UDDA).
  • Review of the American Academy of Neurology's (AAN) guidelines for neurologic death determination.
  • Examination of legal and ethical doctrines, including informed consent and constitutional challenges.

Main Results:

  • While neurologists generally support the amendments for standardizing diagnosis and limiting challenges, concerns exist regarding the AAN guidelines' accuracy in assessing entire brain function cessation.
  • The amendments' classification of death determination as a purely clinical decision may override informed consent and disregard cultural/religious objections to brain death.
  • The amendments may lead to constitutional challenges rather than resolving controversies surrounding brain death.

Conclusions:

  • Nevada's UDDA amendments, despite aiming for clarity, present significant concerns regarding the accuracy of neurologic criteria and the disregard for patient rights and diverse beliefs.
  • The amendments risk legal challenges by potentially conflicting with established ethical and constitutional principles.
  • Further scrutiny is needed to ensure that determinations of death accurately reflect the cessation of all brain functions while respecting individual rights and beliefs.