Citation

Yanke G, Rady MY, Verheijde JL. Med. Sci. Law 2017; 57(2): 100-102.

Affiliation

Scottsdale, Arizona, USA.

Copyright

(Copyright © 2017, British Academy of Forensic Sciences, Publisher SAGE Publishing)

DOI

10.1177/0025802417701036

PMID

28376670

Abstract

In the recent court case of In Re Guardianship of Hailu, the Nevada Supreme Court cast doubt on the acceptability of the American Academy of Neurology's guidelines as a medical standard for determining brain death. The Uniform Determination of Death Act, which has been adopted in every state, requires that brain death diagnoses be made in accordance with accepted medical standards. The Court expressed concern that the guidelines fail to ensure that there is an irreversible cessation of all functions of a person's entire brain, which is a component of the Act's definition of death. Although the Nevada Supreme Court remanded the case to the District Court to hear more expert evidence concerning whether the guidelines constitute "accepted medical standards," the patient who was the subject of the case met the criteria for cardiopulmonary death several weeks prior to the hearing and the legal case became moot. As a result, the issue of whether the American Academy of Neurology guidelines, or some other criteria for determining brain death, are accepted medical standards for determining whether all brain function has ceased remains unresolved.

Language: en

Keywords

Aden Hailu; Uniform Determination of Death Act; bioethics; brain death