Faculty Bibliography

Management of patients with terminal brain disorders can be medically, socially, and ethically complex. Although a growing number of feasible treatment options may exist, there are times when further treatment can no longer meaningfully improve either quality or length of life. Clinicians and patients should discuss goals of care while patients are capable of making their own decisions. However, because such discussions can be challenging, they are often postponed. These discussions are then conducted with patients' health care proxies after patients lose the capacity to make their own decisions. Disagreements may arise when a patient's surrogate desires continued aggressive interventions that are either biologically futile (incapable of producing the intended physiologic result) or potentially inappropriate (potentially capable of producing the patient's intended effect but in conflict with the medical team's ethical principles). This article explores best practices in addressing these types of conflicts in the critical care unit, but these concepts also broadly apply to other sites of care.

Although the concept of death by neurologic criteria is accepted throughout much of the world and death can legally be determined by neurologic criteria throughout the United States, the process is fraught with contentious ethical and legal controversies. I explore historic and contemporary ethical and legal disputes about determination of death by neurologic criteria including the need for consent from patients' surrogates prior to determination of death, the role of religion in determination of death, management of objections to determination of death by neurologic criteria, the approach to patients who are dead by neurologic criteria but are pregnant, and gamete retrieval after determination of death.