The thought of dying can be daunting on the grounds that the masses fear what they do not understand. It is inconceivable for someone to die and return to give a clear account of what transpires when there is a permanent ending of the vital process. Santrock writes, “Twenty-five years ago, determining whether someone was dead was simpler than it is today. The end of certain biological function – such as breathing and blood pressure, and the rigidity of the body (rigor mortis) – were clear signs of death.” (Santrock, p. 413) As time moves on, defining death becomes more entangled. Brain death is one of the more complex forms of determining if life has ended by reason of the various categories an individual may fall within to conclude the type of death. According to Sandtrock (2014), “Brain death is a neurological definition of death which states that a person is brain dead when all electrical activity of the brain has ceased for a specified period of time….Because the brain’s lover portions monitor heartbeat and respiration, individuals whose higher brain areas have died may continue to breathe and have a heartbeat (Binderman, Krakauer, & Sololomon, 2012).” This level of death makes a situation more challenging because a family or medical team is faced with trying to make a decision on the quality of life an individual would have if they were to rely on medical devices to keep them alive. There are even more levels of death that can be fathomed.
According to Santrock
The neocortical brain death definition suggests that death occurs when the cerebrum or upper brain dies, eliminating speech, consciousness and thought; basically, an individual is dead when their personality dies. The trouble here is that an individual who has
Criteria for declaring death using neurological criteria developed, and today a whole brain definition of death is widely used and recognized as an acceptable way to determine death. (Iltis)
Death is in a sense inevitable, we can’t escape from it. In today’s day in age, we are living longer than our parents and our grandparents due to medical technology. But there are so many ethical issues and complications that go hand and hand with death. There are two forms of death, cardiac and brain-oriented. Determining these two forms of death, along with the determined time of death is vital, simply because we don’t want to treat a living person as if they were dead. With so many issues concerning death, we have to protect those who are on the brink of death or terminally ill and can’t speak for themselves, but allowing them to make preparations for the future. Advanced directives makes this possible,
Death is one of the most significant life events people experience. Most people want to die a peaceful death and desire the same outcome for their family and friends. Medical advancements have resulted in people living longer lives with chronic illnesses. Despite the advancements in medicine and the available treatments of today, sometimes the patient is still unable to escape intolerable suffering; the patient’s quality of life diminishes.
McMahan 's The Metaphysics of Brain Death presents a case for the distinction between the body as the organism and the mind as the person. In defining this “mind-body dualism” (sec. 0, abstract), McMahan 's distinction brings forth a greater implication in the criterion for the death of a person, exploring the “dominant conception of brain death” which reasons that the loss of capacity for consciousness, caused by irreversible damage to the whole brain or brain stem, is sufficient for such a declaration as a persons ceasing to live (sec. 1, pars. 1-3). McMahan does not oppose the argument of brain death on the grounds of capacity for consciousness, but rather uses this to present that “the death of the entire brain is not equivalent to
Death at any stage in life is personal and holds different meanings to different people. Society places a great deal of meaning on death based upon age, situation, and their personal experiences and beliefs. The viewpoints of death and dying in early childhood are limited; however, children have a basic understanding of death by the age of two through their own observations of family members (Berger, 2008). Children who are dying often fear death as they do not have a fully developed concept of dying and associate death with abandonment (Berger, 2008). At this life stage, it is important to have guidance from his or her parents to gain a better understanding of death and dying.
Death is not a topic that many people are comfortable with, some people believe it is outrageous for others to play God and decide when to end their lives. While this is true for people with normal pains, there are those who feel they have the right to choose their own fate because they cannot bear their pain and suffering anymore. These are people that are terminally ill, people who were diagnosed with a deadly disease without a cure and feel that death is the only way to relieve that pain. These people has gone through many treatments that are slowly becoming less and less effective. Even though the treatment isn’t working, the patients still have to live through the pain from the treatments. Terminally ill
As people approach the end of their lives, they with their families and their caregivers, face many tasks and decisions. They may be psychological, spiritual, or medical in nature, but all end-of-life choices and medical decisions have complex psychological components, ramifications, and consequences that have a significant impact on the suffering patients and their caregivers.
Per the National Center for Biotechnology Information (NCBI), a diagnosis of brain death is considered legally and clinically dead. It is evidenced by coma, absence of brainstem reflexes and apnea, and is defined as an irreversible loss of brain function. (Brain Death) As a healthcare provider, it can be easy to make a
Theologically and scientifically the concept of death has remained unopposed for centuries, however the idea of how do we conclude what is the true essence of living continues to be widely debated. A curveball case would be one regarding brain-dead patients. In December 2014, patient Jahi McMath of Oakland California – a state in which one who is brain dead is classified as not legally alive - was declared brain-dead by three doctors, thus lawfully ordered to be removed from life support. Valiant disagreement ensued upon her parents refusal to accept this judgement and till today Jahi is on life support. (Drummond, 2015). Fieser (2008) argues that the neurological theory holds the most rational denotation of death, in which absence of any form
Health, M. (n.d.). Brain Death vs. Persistent Vegetative State: What is the Legal Difference? Retrieved August 29, 2015
Some people fear death while others only fear the uncertainty that leads up to it. To some, the process of prolonging the inevitable with an increasingly painful process can seem much more cruel and immoral that just allowing them to die on their own terms.
Our society finds it difficult to talk about dying and euphemisms are the norm. It is typical for both doctors and patients to be hesitant to initiate a discussion on dying. Focus instead is often more often placed on interventions and actions for managing symptoms. This avoidance can leave patients and their families unprepared for the inevitable death. (Schapira, 2010) It also often results in requests for therapies which may be excessive, costly and even painful in the hopes for a cure. One study demonstrates that when patients are aware that they are terminally ill, the majority are able to reach a state of peacefulness and also exhibit lower levels of distress. (Ray, Block, Friedlander, Zhang, Maciejewski & Prigerson, 2006) It is also important that family members are willing to discuss end-of-life options with their loved ones. According to elderly patients, they are most often the ones who initiate these conversations with their
One thing that ponders almost all who live is what happens after one dies. There are multiple theories about life after death, or the absence of it, many dependent on one’s religious beliefs. However, this is also a question philosophers have faced and come up with theories for. Bertrand Russell, a well-known philosopher from the twentieth century, has a theory on the matter. His theory on life after death, in standard form, is as follows: There is a strong correlation between brain states and mental states. In particular, the correlation between brain damage and impairment in mental capacity. So, probably all the mental states and capacities that we associate with a particular person are ontologically dependent on the continued functioning of that individual 's brain. So, if one 's brain ceases to function, then one 's mind ceases, as well. If you survive death, then your mind must survive. But, brain functioning ceases with death. Therefore, you will not survive death (Zelinski “On”). The argument is valid but some question whether it is sound. Russell 's argument is sound because the third premise, if one’s brain ceases to function, then one’s mind ceases to function, is true; the fifth premise, brain functioning ceases with death, is also true; that all leads to the conclusion, your mind will not survive death, being true.
As I slowly opened my eyes and drew in a breath, I started to realize where I was, I didn’t quite remember how I got there but I know that somehow I ended up in a hospital. There was a nurse in there who suddenly let out a gasp. Odd I thought, she quickly rushed out of the room and in what felt like an hour but really was a minute, came back with my parents and a doctor. My mom was sobbing and ran over to embrace me in a huge hug. After giving my mom and I a minute, the doctor walked over to me and started to explain what happened.