Inconsistency between the Circulatory and the Brain Criteria of Death in the Uniform Determination of Death Act Molina Pérez, Alberto Bernat, James L. Dalle Ave, Anne conceptual analysis death determination functions Uniform Death Determination Act whole-brain death The Uniform Determination of Death Act (UDDA) provides that “an individual who has sustained either (1) irreversible cessation of circulatory and respiratory functions or (2) irreversible cessation of all functions of the entire brain, including the brain stem, is dead.” We show that the UDDA contains two conflicting interpretations of the phrase “cessation of functions.” By one interpretation, what matters for the determination of death is the cessation of spontaneous functions only, regardless of their generation by artificial means. By the other, what matters is the cessation of both spontaneous and artificially supported functions. Because each UDDA criterion uses a different interpretation, the law is conceptually inconsistent. A single consistent interpretation would lead to the conclusion that conscious individuals whose respiratory and circulatory functions are artificially supported are actually dead, or that individuals whose brain is entirely and irreversibly destroyed may be alive. We explore solutions to mitigate the inconsistency. 2024-11-25T07:23:08Z 2024-11-25T07:23:08Z 2023-06-26 journal article Alberto Molina-Pérez, James L Bernat, Anne Dalle Ave, Inconsistency between the Circulatory and the Brain Criteria of Death in the Uniform Determination of Death Act, The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy: A Forum for Bioethics and Philosophy of Medicine, Volume 48, Issue 5, October 2023, Pages 422–433, https://doi.org/10.1093/jmp/jhad029 https://hdl.handle.net/10481/97292 https://doi.org/10.1093/jmp/jhad029 eng http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ open access Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 Internacional Oxford University Press