The horrible truth about euthenasia and organ donation/harvesting

[bear06]

The problem with all of this is you are dead, in PVS, etc. when a doctor who may have less than an ethical stance on this issue says you are. Look at Terri Schiavo. She was declared by a few doctors to be in PVS, she was not. This whole situation has seemed to come to you are dead if some view you to be a nuisance to their line of thinking not if you truly are!

 

[vern_humphrey]

bear06:

The problem with all of this is you are dead, in PVS, etc. when a doctor who may have less than an ethical stance on this issue says you are. Look at Terri Schiavo. She was declared by a few doctors to be in PVS, she was not. This whole situation has seemed to come to you are dead if some view you to be a nuisance to their line of thinking not if you truly are!

If I were in that situation and had a choice – I’d a lot rather have them put me on a drip and remove my organs than let me die an agonizing death by dehydration!

 

[JimG]

I have no problem with organ donation in theory or the Church’s approval of it, (keeping in mind that the Church approves donation of vital organs after death, but does not specifically define death in any medical sense.) But having read some material along the lines of that which was linked by paramedicgirl, I might have some qualms with the practical application of it.

One problem with the use of brain death as a criterion for death is that it equates the person with the brain. No functioning brain, no person. Using that criterion, one might accept early abortion, or perhaps euthanasia for the demented. Philosophically, it’s never been the position of the Church that the soul resides only in the brain. Rather, the soul is the life principle of the entire body. While the soul is spirit—not material, not localized—as the life principle of the body it is said to be in every part of the body.

I don’t think that human beings are reducible to their brains. But I’ve been told that if “brain death” has truly occurred, the rest of the body will soon follow. I’d like to be sure that physicians have an ironclad standard to determine when brain death has occurred, and also to be assured that brain death equals real death.

 

[paramedicgirl]

vern humphrey:

You have a specific issue here – so take up arms against that issue, not against organ transplants in general and “the ethics of it all.” ?

I only posted that article as an interesting side note.
vern humphrey:

Now, what would be unethical about this if the organs were not removed? The Church allows us to turn off the ventilator when hope is gone, does it not?

You have taken that text out of context. Here is the complete version:

While brain death organ donation means that the person is legally dead but still has a heartbeat when organs are harvested, the potential NHBD patient does not meet the brain death criteria but is termed “hopeless” or “vegetative” soon after suffering a devastating condition such as a severe stroke or trauma, and while still needing a ventilator to breathe.* Because of the legal acceptance of the so-called “right to die”, families or other surrogates then agree to have the ventilator turned off, a “do not resuscitate” order is written, and when the patient’s breathing and heartbeat stops, the organs are removed.*
In NHBD, the ventilator is usually stopped in an operating room while a doctor watches for up to one hour until the heartbeat and breathing stops. After an interval of usually just 2 to 5 minutes, the patient is declared dead and the transplant team takes over to remove the organs. A determination of brain death is considered unnecessary even though one of the inventors of the NHBD protocol, Dr. Michael DeVita has admitted, “the possibility of [brain function] recovery exists for at least 15 minutes”. Nonetheless, Dr. DeVita defends waiting only 2 minutes before harvesting the organs because he believes that the person is unconscious and, as he writes, “the 2-minute time span probably fits with the layperson’s conception of how death ought to be determined”.

 

[crusader4life]

vern humphrey:

Now there you lost me. To donate organs is a good thing, a life-affirming thing, and the Church agrees.

Are we obliged to do this good, life-affirming thing in a manner that makes us likely to fail?

Now you lost me. I thought you were talking about just keeping a life going by extrodinary means. Now it seems that you were just talking about the organ donation/euthenasia situation. Clear me up please!

 

[Trelow]

I know I got here late but they are dead. If life support was taken away they would not live because their brain is dead. It cannot function to tell their heart to beat, or any-other organ to work for that matter. Dead is dead.

Prior toe a pronouncement of brain death they preform several gasp tests to determine wither or not the person is alive. If they are removed from support and they gasp for air, then they are alive, if not they the body’s auto-response is gone and obviously their brain does not function AT ALL. This test is repeated after several hours, even if they fail the gasp test the first time.

There is a world of difference between being brain dead, and being “vegetative”, in a coma, yadda yadda yadda.

When you are brain dead, you are well, dead.

 

[vern_humphrey]

paramedicgirl:

You have taken that text out of context. Here is the complete version:

While brain death organ donation means that the person is legally dead but still has a heartbeat when organs are harvested, the potential NHBD patient does not meet the brain death criteria but is termed “hopeless” or “vegetative” soon after suffering a devastating condition such as a severe stroke or trauma, and while still needing a ventilator to breathe.* Because of the legal acceptance of the so-called “right to die”, families or other surrogates then agree to have the ventilator turned off, a “do not resuscitate” order is written, and when the patient’s breathing and heartbeat stops, the organs are removed.*
In NHBD, the ventilator is usually stopped in an operating room while a doctor watches for up to one hour until the heartbeat and breathing stops. After an interval of usually just 2 to 5 minutes, the patient is declared dead and the transplant team takes over to remove the organs. A determination of brain death is considered unnecessary even though one of the inventors of the NHBD protocol, Dr. Michael DeVita has admitted, “the possibility of [brain function] recovery exists for at least 15 minutes”. Nonetheless, Dr. DeVita defends waiting only 2 minutes before harvesting the organs because he believes that the person is unconscious and, as he writes, “the 2-minute time span probably fits with the layperson’s conception of how death ought to be determined”.

You miss my point. If there were no organ donation in question, the family (or a written document prepared beforehand by the patient) would make it licit to turn off the heart-machine in a case like this - and the Church would not consider that immoral.

 

[paramedicgirl]

Trelow:

When you are brain dead, you are well, dead.

So are you saying the soul lives in the brain? Not in the body?

 

[paramedicgirl]

vern humphrey:

You miss my point. If there were no organ donation in question, the family (or a written document prepared beforehand by the patient) would make it licit to turn off the heart-machine in a case like this - and the Church would not consider that immoral.

I agree. In extraordinary circumstances it is within moral guidelines to turn off a life support machine and let nature take its course. What I find unethical is the new definition of death that allows doctors to remove organs from a living patient which ultimately causes their biological death to occur.

 

[vern_humphrey]

paramedicgirl:

I agree. In extraordinary circumstances it is within moral guidelines to turn off a life support machine and let nature take its course. What I find unethical is the new definition of death that allows doctors to remove organs from a living patient which ultimately causes their biological death to occur.

According to the material you cited, that’s not what’s happening here. The patients in question had no possibility of recovery, and would have died after the heart-lung machine was turned off. And, as we both agree, turning off the heat-lung machine was morally permissible.

I have no problem with seeking clearer rules for determining death before removing organs, but let’s not throw out the baby with the bathwater.

 

[Trelow]

paramedicgirl:

So are you saying the soul lives in the brain? Not in the body?

I’m saying that when somebody is dead they are dead.

You must not understand what actual brain death is. Please research the topic more thoroughly. When you are brain dead you are dead. Your body cannot function AT ALL. It is artificially kept functioning, “alive” if you will, by machines.

As Vern says above, “According to the material you cited, that’s not what’s happening here. The patients in question had no possibility of recovery, and would have died after the heart-lung machine was turned off. And, as we both agree, turning off the heat-lung machine was morally permissible.”

 

[Trelow]

Another thing

" After an interval of usually just 2 to 5 minutes, the patient is declared dead and the transplant team takes over to remove the organs"

Not true. The case is referred to the transplant team, they will not harvest the organs for quite some time. They will even repeat the gasp test. It’s usually more like 12-18 hours.

 

[paramedicgirl]

Trelow:

You must not understand what actual brain death is. Please research the topic more thoroughly.

I find this rather insulting. I know the anatomy and structure of the brain, and how each of those various specialized areas provide bodily functions.

I am also aware of the various types of brain death and how different countries have different laws to diagnose brain death.

I have also kept alive those patients who have suffered brain trauma. As I said in an earlier post, they are not considered dead when they arrive at the hospital. Nor are they considered dead when we transport them out to a major hospital.

The moral dilemma of brain death seems to escape you. It is all about whether the patient still possesses his soul.

 

[wabrams]

paramedicgirl:

I find this rather insulting. I know the anatomy and structure of the brain, and how each of those various specialized areas provide bodily functions.

I am also aware of the various types of brain death and how different countries have different laws to diagnose brain death.

I have also kept alive those patients who have suffered brain trauma. As I said in an earlier post, they are not considered dead when they arrive at the hospital. Nor are they considered dead when we transport them out to a major hospital.

The moral dilemma of brain death seems to escape you. It is all about whether the patient still possesses his soul.

I don’t think you get it: if your brain can no longer operate the heart and lungs, you’re dead. We’re not talking about brain trauma, we’re talking about the brain ceasing to work.

 

[Trelow]

paramedicgirl:

I find this rather insulting. I know the anatomy and structure of the brain, and how each of those various specialized areas provide bodily functions.

I am also aware of the various types of brain death and how different countries have different laws to diagnose brain death.

I have also kept alive those patients who have suffered brain trauma. As I said in an earlier post, they are not considered dead when they arrive at the hospital. Nor are they considered dead when we transport them out to a major hospital.

The moral dilemma of brain death seems to escape you. It is all about whether the patient still possesses his soul.

There is no moral dilemma for me. If they are dead then, well they are dead. When the soul leaves the body is not something we are privy to as of yet.

If they are brain dead then it is the same as if you were to cut open their head and take their brain out completely. You would be able to decapitate them, and you could keep their body functioning enough to harvest organs. It’s possible, albeit impractical.

Again I do believe you don’t quite understand what constitutes brain death. So you are saying that if the entire autonomy and structure of the brain is dead doesn’t work at all, none, zilch, no automatous responses at all, none, nada; then until a cardiac death the person is still alive? I don’t buy it. remember that the only thing preventing a cardiac death is the heart/lung machine.

 

[paramedicgirl]

wabrams:

I don’t think you get it: if your brain can no longer operate the heart and lungs, you’re dead. We’re not talking about brain trauma, we’re talking about the brain ceasing to work.

I get it more than you know. Brain trauma is precisely what causes the brain to cease functioning, whether by accidental trauma or by damage incurred by cardiac or respiratory arrest. Read on…

World wide, there are two distinct mechanisms of death, those being brain stem death and irreversible cardiopulmonary arrest. These two mechanisms only differ by one thing – death is diagnosed in the presence or absence of a beating heart.

Until the advent of organ transplants, death has always been associated with cardiac standstill. Now there is a new definition for death, that of brain death. In a brain dead patient, machines replicate the brain’s function of circulating oxygenated blood. This sustained life can continue for days or weeks, sometimes much longer than doctors expect.

The higher brain stem houses the Reticular Activating System, which is responsible for maintaining our awake state. The medulla is the lower portion of the brain stem, continuous with the spinal cord, which regulates respiration and heart beat.

In severe brain trauma, when there is disruption at or below the level where the
Reticular Activating System splits to form the complex neuronal network that courses between the cerebral hemispheres, coma results. What this means is that an increase of intracranial pressure, as may occur in head injury, can squeeze the cerebellum (the part of the brain that coordinates movement) down through the foramen magnum and in the process squash the medulla against the bones of the skull. This is a common means where brain trauma results in brainstem death.

There is a physiological distinction between brainstem death and death of the whole brain. The arteries that supply the brainstem also supply the cerebellum and cerebrum (the part of the brain associated with higher functions like reasoning). When cerebral swelling and herniation occur, ischemia of the brain stem and higher structures occur, compounding mechanical damage.

Brain cells do not all die at the same time. Consequently, whatever diagnostic tests are used to determine brain death, none are capable of determining that all brain cells are dead.

These are simple medical tests that are part of a complex process that leads to the diagnosis of brainstem death. Incredibly, there exists a risk of error from inappropriate testing in patients who have reversible coma, apnea and absent cranial nerve reflexes.

It is a well researched field, but controversy still exists among medical professionals, scientists, anthropologists, and ethicists.

 

[paramedicgirl]

Trelow:

There is no moral dilemma for me. If they are dead then, well they are dead. When the soul leaves the body is not something we are privy to as of yet…

The Church has always defined death as the separation of body and soul. The Church however, has left the medical definition of death up to science, which as we all know has been changed from the traditional definition of cardio-respiratory death to that of brain death to accomodate the science of organ transplants.

The Church rightly says that organ transplantaion is a good and meritorious act as long as it occurs after death, but the Church leaves the medical definition of death up to science. That is where the moral dilemma comes in. Organs need to be oxygenated and adequately perfused to be useful. This can only be accomplished by maintaining respirations, heart beat and blood pressure.

We will never know for sure when our soul separates from our body, though, will we?

 

[Trelow]

paramedicgirl:

We will never know for sure when our soul separates from our body, though, will we?

Not until it happens to us, no.

 

[2heartsaz1]

LittleDeb:

I am sorry I don’t believe it is this way. My friends in the medical field say that the ventilator is turned off and the patient is allowed to die naturally, then declared dead. Only in the next moments after that are the organs harvested.

Deb, whether you believe it this way or not, this REALLY happens!
Take it from the daughter of an undertaker- aka ‘embalmer’ whose grandfather owned and directed the mortuary in southern California.

As an RN I was once a donor card carrier until I learned the truth.

Let’s also consider the ‘donor issues’ across the borders- in Mexico and China, where prisoners are forced to ‘donate’ organs and where ?donated organs are SOLD.

Whether or not we choose to believe, this is truly an abuse of the human dignity God desires and gives us.

Pax,
D in AZ

 

[vern_humphrey]

2heartsaz1:

Deb, whether you believe it this way or not, this REALLY happens!
Take it from the daughter of an undertaker- aka ‘embalmer’ whose grandfather owned and directed the mortuary in southern California.

As an RN I was once a donor card carrier until I learned the truth.

Let’s also consider the ‘donor issues’ across the borders- in Mexico and China, where prisoners are forced to ‘donate’ organs and where ?donated organs are SOLD.

Whether or not we choose to believe, this is truly an abuse of the human dignity God desires and gives us.

Pax,
D in AZ

Okay, you’ve outlined the problem.

What’s your solution?

In your own personal case, you’ve simply put a stop to organ donation and organ transplants. Now, the Church does not obligate us to donate our organs but it does clearly consider organ donation a Christian act.

To oppose organ donation across the board would not be in keeping with Catholic teaching.

So again, what’s your solution?