This Article  • References  • Full text PDF  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Similar articles in JAMA  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

Jamil H. Khan, MD
Eastern Virginia Medical School Norfolk

JAMA. 1995;274(22):1758.

	Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text PDF and any section headings.

To the Editor.

—The AMA Council on Ethical and Judicial Affairs¹ has changed its previous position and now supports the use of live anencephalic infants as organ donors. However, in their report, fundamental issues relating to the definition of personhood and even the definition of life and death are not adequately addressed.

In undermining the "dead donor"² rule, the report seems to be arguing for "cortical death"—the absence of higher brain function as a new definition of death—without overtly stating this point. A circumstance in which higher brain function is not present and will never be possible is the defining feature of the reasoning used by the Council. This fundamental change in defining life and death needs open discussion and a broad-based consensus before being adopted.

Other clinical situations occur in which an argument can be made for organ procurement from a living donor. A severely asphyxiated neonate . . . [Full Text PDF of this Article]

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter     What's this?