You are not logged in.

Pediatric donation after circulatory determination of death: Respecting the interests of children through routine consideration of donation opportunities

Martin, Dominique E., Siebelink, Marion J. and Domínguez-Gil, Beatriz 2015, Pediatric donation after circulatory determination of death: Respecting the interests of children through routine consideration of donation opportunities, American journal of bioethics, vol. 15, no. 8, pp. 23-25, doi: 10.1080/15265161.2015.1045090.

Attached Files
Name Description MIMEType Size Downloads

Title Pediatric donation after circulatory determination of death: Respecting the interests of children through routine consideration of donation opportunities
Author(s) Martin, Dominique E.ORCID iD for Martin, Dominique E. orcid.org/0000-0001-9363-0770
Siebelink, Marion J.
Domínguez-Gil, Beatriz
Journal name American journal of bioethics
Volume number 15
Issue number 8
Start page 23
End page 25
Total pages 4
Publisher Taylor & Francis
Place of publication London, Eng.
Publication date 2015
ISSN 1526-5161
1536-0075
Summary Overby and colleagues (2015) highlight the complexities of consent to or authorization for organ procurement in the setting of controlled donation after circulatory determination of death (cDCDD). They note that decision making about cDCDD is complicated by clinical uncertainties and ethical controversies regarding protocols for the determination of death by circulatory criteria and the use of perimortem interventions to support organ procurement, and that these uncertainties and controversies may be exacerbated in the pediatric context. Suggesting that parents and clinicians may “unconsciously” compromise the best interests of their own children and patients in order to achieve organ procurement goals, Overby and colleagues argue that children are at risk of instrumentalization when the option of cDCDD is presented. This claim is further grounded in their belief that children lack autonomy and can have no interest in becoming organ donors. In this commentary, we contest these assumptions, the implications of which extend beyond cDCDD and threaten to undermine programs of pediatric deceased donation, including donation after the neurologic determination of death (DNDD). We argue that routine consideration of the possibility of organ donation by critically ill children is consistent with respect for children’s best interests and, most importantly, their human dignity.
Language eng
DOI 10.1080/15265161.2015.1045090
Field of Research 1117 Public Health And Health Services
2201 Applied Ethics
Socio Economic Objective 929999 Health not elsewhere classified
HERDC Research category C1.1 Refereed article in a scholarly journal
ERA Research output type C Journal article
Copyright notice ©2015, Taylor & Francis
Persistent URL http://hdl.handle.net/10536/DRO/DU:30082092

Document type: Journal Article
Collection: School of Medicine
Connect to link resolver
 
Unless expressly stated otherwise, the copyright for items in DRO is owned by the author, with all rights reserved.

Versions
Version Filter Type
Citation counts: TR Web of Science Citation Count  Cited 0 times in TR Web of Science
Scopus Citation Count Cited 0 times in Scopus
Google Scholar Search Google Scholar
Access Statistics: 19 Abstract Views, 4 File Downloads  -  Detailed Statistics
Created: Thu, 10 Mar 2016, 14:38:06 EST

Every reasonable effort has been made to ensure that permission has been obtained for items included in DRO. If you believe that your rights have been infringed by this repository, please contact drosupport@deakin.edu.au.