ArticleThe Journal of medicine and philosophy2016
The Brain Dead Patient Is Still Sentient: A Further Reply to Patrick Lee and Germain Grisez.
Article in The Journal of medicine and philosophy, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- On the Death of a Self-Integrating Organism: A Reply to "A Biophilosophical Approach to the Determination of Brain Death".The Linacre quarterly · 2026Article
- Humility before New Scientific Evidence: We No Longer Have Moral Certainty that "Brain Death" Is True Death.The Linacre quarterly · 2019Article
- Total Brain Death and the Integration of the Body Required of a Human Being.The Journal of medicine and philosophy · 2016Article
- Determination of Death: A Scientific Perspective on Biological Integration.The Journal of medicine and philosophy · 2016Article
- Brain Death and Human Organismal Integration: A Symposium on the Definition of Death.The Journal of medicine and philosophy · 2016Article
- Symposium on the Definition of Death: Summary Statement.The Journal of medicine and philosophy · 2016Article
- Deconstructing the Brain Disconnection-Brain Death Analogy and Clarifying the Rationale for the Neurological Criterion of Death.The Journal of medicine and philosophy · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
- Comment on
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Patrick Lee and Germain Grisez have argued that the total brain dead patient is still dead because the integrated entity that remains is not even an animal, not only because he is not sentient but also, and more importantly, because he has lost the radical capacity for sentience. In this essay, written from within and as a contribution to the Catholic philosophical tradition, I respond to Lee and Grisez's argument by proposing that the brain dead patient is still sentient because an animal with an intact but severed spinal cord can still perceive and respond to external stimuli. The brain dead patient is an unconscious sentient organism.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.