Brain death is “a social and legal construct based on debatable beliefs and values.”
Dr. Lauris Kaldjian directs the program in bioethics and humanities at the Carver College of Medicine at the University of Iowa, where he is also a professor in the department of internal medicine.
He recently spoke at the Columbia School of Professional Studies’ webinar, “Time to Rethink Brain Death: A Discussion with Experts.”
Speaking about the 1968 Harvard ad hoc Committee that originally proposed the idea of brain death, Dr. Kaldjian said:
“I have no way to other than conclude that the main driver was definitely the desire for transplantable organs. But I acknowledge that the other primary rationale that was stated was that there was a concern about ICUs getting overpopulated with severely brain injured individuals.”
“…I think, (there were) two transplant surgeons on it who were clearly interested in the question of transplantation. And specifically a key line from that JAMA 1968 article says from the authors themselves “our primary purpose is to define irreversible coma as a new criterion for death.” That to me strikes me as a social and legal fiction, not a biological discovery. So I'll be blunt about that.”
“…I would just say by way of conclusion that the idea of brain death, I really think, is a social and legal construct based on debatable beliefs and values. It's not primarily a concept determined by biological observation alone.”