• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

相似文献

1
Implications of John Kavanaugh's Philosophy of the Human Person as Embodied Reflexive Consciousness for Conscientious Decision-making in Brain Death.约翰·卡瓦诺的“作为具身反思意识的人类哲学”对脑死亡中尽责决策的影响。
Linacre Q. 2021 Feb;88(1):71-81. doi: 10.1177/0024363920924876. Epub 2020 May 15.
2
Postmodern personhood: a matter of consciousness.后现代人格:一个意识问题。
Bioethics. 1997 Jul-Oct;11(3-4):206-16. doi: 10.1111/1467-8519.00059.
3
[The origin of informed consent].[知情同意的起源]
Acta Otorhinolaryngol Ital. 2005 Oct;25(5):312-27.
4
The Moral Illicitness of Relying Solely on Neurological Criteria for the Determination of Death: A Catholic Response to "Brain Death".仅依靠神经学标准判定死亡的道德非法性:天主教对“脑死亡”的回应
Linacre Q. 2023 Aug;90(3):260-272. doi: 10.1177/00243639231189330. Epub 2023 Aug 2.
5
Organ Procurement From Patients With Trauma从创伤患者获取器官
6
Does Controlled Donation after Circulatory Death Violate the Dead Donor Rule?控制性心脏死亡后捐献是否违反了死亡器官捐献者规则?
Am J Bioeth. 2023 Feb;23(2):4-11. doi: 10.1080/15265161.2022.2040646. Epub 2022 Mar 3.
7
Having a life versus being alive.拥有生活与仅仅活着。
J Med Ethics. 1984 Mar;10(1):5-8. doi: 10.1136/jme.10.1.5.
8
Tracing the soul: medical decisions at the margins of life.追寻灵魂:生命边缘的医学抉择
Christ Bioeth. 2000 Apr;6(1):49-69. doi: 10.1076/1380-3603(200004)6:1;1-C;FT049.
9
Constructing the death elephant: a synthetic paradigm shift for the definition, criteria, and tests for death.构建死亡大象:死亡定义、标准及判定的一种综合性范式转变
J Med Philos. 2010 Jun;35(3):256-98. doi: 10.1093/jmp/jhq022. Epub 2010 May 3.
10
The failure of theories of personhood.人格理论的失败。
Kennedy Inst Ethics J. 1999 Dec;9(4):309-24. doi: 10.1353/ken.1999.0023.

本文引用的文献

1
The Trouble with Anesthetizing the Dead.麻醉死者的问题。
Linacre Q. 2019 Nov;86(4):271-274. doi: 10.1177/0024363919876388. Epub 2019 Sep 25.
2
Exploring the life death divide, questions remain long after the Harvard Criteria.探究生死界限,在哈佛标准提出很久之后,问题依然存在。
Linacre Q. 2019 Nov;86(4):268-270. doi: 10.1177/0024363919877021. Epub 2019 Nov 25.
3
Pope John Paul II and the neurological standard for the determination of death: A critical analysis of his address to the Transplantation Society.教皇约翰·保罗二世与判定死亡的神经学标准:对他在移植学会演讲的批判性分析
Linacre Q. 2017 May;84(2):155-186. doi: 10.1080/00243639.2017.1307502. Epub 2017 Jun 1.
4
Hypothalamic-Pituitary Function in Brain Death: A Review.脑死亡中的下丘脑 - 垂体功能:综述
J Intensive Care Med. 2016 Jan;31(1):41-50. doi: 10.1177/0885066614527410. Epub 2014 Mar 31.
5
The nature of consciousness.意识的本质。
Handb Clin Neurol. 2013;118:373-407. doi: 10.1016/B978-0-444-53501-6.00031-7.
6
Brain death: time for an international consensus.脑死亡:达成国际共识的时刻。
Br J Anaesth. 2012 Jan;108 Suppl 1:i6-9. doi: 10.1093/bja/aer355.
7
Variability of brain death determination guidelines in leading US neurologic institutions.美国主要神经机构脑死亡判定指南的差异
Neurology. 2008 Jan 22;70(4):284-9. doi: 10.1212/01.wnl.0000296278.59487.c2. Epub 2007 Dec 12.
8
Consciousness.意识
Brain. 2001 Jul;124(Pt 7):1263-89. doi: 10.1093/brain/124.7.1263.
9
The function of the hypothalamo-pituitary axis in brain dead patients.脑死亡患者下丘脑 - 垂体轴的功能
Acta Neurochir (Wien). 1993;123(1-2):64-75. doi: 10.1007/BF01476288.
10
Electroencephalographic activity after brain death.
Arch Neurol. 1987 Sep;44(9):948-54. doi: 10.1001/archneur.1987.00520210048018.

约翰·卡瓦诺的“作为具身反思意识的人类哲学”对脑死亡中尽责决策的影响。

Implications of John Kavanaugh's Philosophy of the Human Person as Embodied Reflexive Consciousness for Conscientious Decision-making in Brain Death.

作者信息

Eble Joseph

机构信息

Fidelis Radiology, Tulsa, OK, USA.

出版信息

Linacre Q. 2021 Feb;88(1):71-81. doi: 10.1177/0024363920924876. Epub 2020 May 15.

DOI:10.1177/0024363920924876
PMID:33487748
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7804512/
Abstract

This article reviews the work of Fr. John F. Kavanaugh, SJ (1941-2012), on the human person as embodied reflexive consciousness (RC). It then analyzes the implications of his work for the subject of brain death. Case studies are reviewed which suggest that RC persists unchanged in the setting of substantial brain trauma. RC is posited as an immaterial endowment, rather than a material phenomenon, which is fully present so long as a person is alive and becomes absent when a person is truly dead. As the endowment which makes possible ethical action and is common to all human persons, RC becomes the foundation of human equality. Empirically ascertaining the presence or absence of RC may not be possible-its demonstration may be precluded by physical immaturity or damage. Therefore, until the human person and not only the brain has wholly and irreversibly died, RC should be assumed to be present. The current criteria for brain death are incapable of ensuring that the entire brain has permanently and irreversibly ceased to function. Therefore, RC may still be present in those whose organs are harvested after meeting the criteria for brain death. As such, a human person would still be present, albeit a wounded human person. Based on this, a healthcare provider could (and likely should) in good conscience oppose the use of brain death criteria for purposes of harvesting vital organs. On a societal level, utilizing brain death criteria to declare a person dead has the potential in any given case to violate the dead donor rule, and as such conflicts with the widely held moral consensus that organs should only be harvested from those who are dead. Healthcare providers should advocate for medicolegal frameworks consistent with their informed consciences.

摘要

本文回顾了耶稣会神父约翰·F·卡瓦诺(1941 - 2012)关于作为具身反思意识(RC)的人的研究工作。接着分析了他的工作对脑死亡主题的影响。文中回顾的案例研究表明,在严重脑外伤情况下,反思意识保持不变。反思意识被假定为一种非物质禀赋,而非物质现象,只要人活着它就完全存在,人真正死亡时它就消失。作为使道德行为成为可能且为所有人共有的禀赋,反思意识成为人类平等的基础。从经验上确定反思意识的有无可能并不可行——身体不成熟或受损可能会妨碍对其的证明。因此,在人(而非仅仅是大脑)完全且不可逆转地死亡之前,应假定反思意识存在。当前的脑死亡标准无法确保整个大脑已永久且不可逆转地停止运作。所以,在符合脑死亡标准后摘取器官的人可能仍存在反思意识。如此一来,即便这个人受到了伤害,一个人仍然存在。基于此,医疗保健提供者凭良心可以(而且很可能应该)反对将脑死亡标准用于摘取重要器官的目的。在社会层面,利用脑死亡标准宣布一个人死亡在任何特定情况下都有可能违反死体器官捐赠规则,因此与器官应仅从已死亡者身上摘取这一广泛持有的道德共识相冲突。医疗保健提供者应倡导符合其知情良知的法医学框架。