This book challenges conventional medical ethics by exposing the inconsistency between the reality of end-of-life practices and established ethical justifications of them.

"In this paper we ... maintain that the concepts that underlie brain death are not biologically plausible, may be unacceptable to the community at large and are inconsistent with the present legal framework" -- Introd.

The two volumes of Death, Dying, and the Ending of Life present the core of recent philosophical work on end-of-life issues. Volume I examines issues in death and consent: the nature of death, brain death and the uses of the dead and decision-making at the end of life, including the use of advance directives and decision-making about the continuation, discontinuation, or futility of treatment for competent and incompetent patients and children. Volume II, on justice and hastening death, examines whether there is a difference between killing and letting die, issues about physician-assisted suicide and euthanasia and questions about distributive justice and decisions about life and death.

The human body defines a lucrative site of reusable parts, ranging from whole organs to minuscule and even microscopic tissues. Although the medical practices that enable the transfer of parts from one body to another most certainly relieve suffering and extend lives, they have also irrevocably altered perceptions of the cultural values assigned to the body. In Bodies, Commodities, and Biotechnologies, Lesley A. Sharp probes the ideological assumptions underlying the transfer of body parts, the social significance of donors' deaths, and the medico-scientific desires surrounding complex forms of body repair. She also considers the experimental realm, in which nonhuman species and artificial devices present further opportunities for recovery and controversy. A compelling scientific investigation and social critique, Bodies, Commodities, and Biotechnologies explores the pervasive, and at times pernicious, practices shaping American biomedicine in the twenty-first century.

In 1997, the Institute of Medicine published a report entitled Non-Heart- Beating Organ Transplantation: Medical and Ethical Issues in Procurement. The findings and recommendations of that study defined the ethical and scientific basis for non-heart-beating organ donation and transplantation, and provided specific recommendations for practices that affirm patient welfare, promote patient and family choice, and avoid conflicts of interest. Following the 1997 study, the Department of Health and Human Services requested a follow up study to promote such efforts. The central activity for this study was a workshop held in Washington, D.C., on May 24-25, 1999. The workshop provided the opportunity for extensive dialogue on non-heart-beating organ donation among hospitals and organ procurement organizations (OPOs) that are actively involved in non-heartbeating organ and tissue donation and those with concerns about whether and how to proceed. The findings and recommendations of this report are based in large measure on the discussions and insights from that workshop. Non-Heart-Beating Organ Transplantation includes seven recommendations for developing and implementing non-heart-beating-donor protocols. These recommendations were based on the findings and recommendations from the 1997 IOM report and consensus achieved among participants at the national workshop. The committee developed these recommendations as steps towards an approach to non-heart-beating-donor organ donation and procurement consistent with underlying scientific and ethical guidelines, patient and family options and choices, and public trust in organ donation.

Originally published in 1990, this study of the moral problems bound up with transplant therapy addresses a finely balanced distinction between ethical issues relating to its experimental nature on the one hand and those which arise when transplantation is routine on the other. Among the issues examined are proposals for routine cadaveric harvesting, criteria for organ and tissue procurement from living donors, foetuses, non-human animals and current ethical problems with artificial implants. Written as a contribution to practical philosophy, this book will interest ethicists and health care professionals.

Rates of organ donation lag far behind the increasing need. At the start of 2006, more than 90,000 people were waiting to receive a solid organ (kidney, liver, lung, pancreas, heart, or intestine). Organ Donation examines a wide range of proposals to increase organ donation, including policies that presume consent for donation as well as the use of financial incentives such as direct payments, coverage of funeral expenses, and charitable contributions. This book urges federal agencies, nonprofit groups, and others to boost opportunities for people to record their decisions to donate, strengthen efforts to educate the public about the benefits of organ donation, and continue to improve donation systems. Organ Donation also supports initiatives to increase donations from people whose deaths are the result of irreversible cardiac failure. This book emphasizes that all members of society have a stake in an adequate supply of organs for patients in need, because each individual is a potential recipient as well as a potential donor.

With the success of organ transplantation and the declining number of heart beating cadaver donors, the number of patients awaiting a transplant continues to rise. This means that alternative sources of donors have been sought, including donors after cardiac death. Such donors sustain rapid damage to their organs due to ischaemia, and as a consequence some organs do not work initially and some none at all. The proportion of such transplants has increased dramatically in recent years- 25% of kidney transplants in the UK were from such donors in 2006 highlighting how much progress has been made. Written by international experts, this book lays out the moral, legal and ethical restraints to using such donors for organ transplant together with the techniques that have been adopted to improve their outcome. The different approaches and results of renal transplant according to country are covered together with the procedures and outcomes adopted to use other organs, notably the liver and lungs.

New technologies and medical treatments have complicated questions such as how to determine the moment when someone has died. The result is a failure to establish consensus on the definition of death and the criteria by which the moment of death is determined. This creates confusion and disagreement not only among medical, legal, and insurance professionals but also within families faced with difficult decisions concerning their loved ones. Distinguished bioethicists Robert M. Veatch and Lainie F. Ross argue that the definition of death is not a scientific question but a social one rooted in religious, philosophical, and social beliefs. Drawing on history and recent court cases, the authors detail three potential definitions of death -- the whole-brain concept; the circulatory, or somatic, concept; and the higher-brain concept. Because no one definition of death commands majority support, it creates a major public policy problem. The authors cede that society needs a default definition to proceed in certain cases, like those involving organ transplantation. But they also argue the decision-making process must give individuals the space to choose among plausible definitions of death according to personal beliefs. Taken in part from the authors' latest edition of their groundbreaking work on transplantation ethics, Defining Death is an indispensable guide for professionals in medicine, law, insurance, public policy, theology, and philosophy as well as lay people trying to decide when they want to be treated as dead.

Medical knowledge and technology have been sufficiently advanced for surgeons to perform thousands of transplants each year. This text traces the discourse since 1970 that contributed to the locating of a new criterion of death in the brain.