Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-4rdrl Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-05T20:11:42.475Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Natural Right to Grow and Die in the Form of Wholeness: A Philosophical Interpretation of the Ontological Status of Brain-dead Children

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2024

Masahiro Morioka
Masahiro Morioka*
Affiliation:
Osaka Prefecture University, Japan
*
Masahiro Morioka, Osaka Prefecture University, 1-1 Gakuen-cho, Nakaku, Sakai, Osaka 599-8531, Japan. Email: morioka@hs.osakafu-u.ac.jp
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

In this paper, I would like to argue that brain-dead small children have a natural right not to be invaded by other people even if their organs can save the lives of other suffering patients. My basic idea is that growing human beings have the right to grow in the form of wholeness, and dying human beings also have the right to die in the form of wholeness; in other words, they have the right to be protected from outside invasion, unless they have declared their wish to abandon that right beforehand. I call this the principle of wholeness. Natural rights, which were discussed by Hobbes and Locke in the 17th century, have to be extended to include the right to grow and die in the form of wholeness in the age of scientific civilization, where peripheral human lives are being threatened by aggressive biomedicine and other advanced technologies.

Type
Articles
Information
Diogenes , Volume 57 , Issue 3: Japanese Philosophy Today , August 2010 , pp. 103 - 116
Copyright
Copyright © ICPHS 2011

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Akabayashi, A, Morioka, M (1989) Research on dead persons. Annals of Internal Medicine, 111(1): 89–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cohen, E (2006) Conservative bioethics and the search for wisdom. Hastings Center Report, 36(1): 44–56.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Engelhardt, HT Jr (1996) The Foundation of Bioethics. Oxford: Oxford UP.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jonas, H (1974) Against the stream: Comments on the definition and redefinition of death. In Philosophical Essays: From Ancient Creed to Technological Man. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Kamei, C (2002) 陽だまりの病室で. Osaka: Medica Shuppan.Google ScholarPubMed
Kato, M (2009) Women’s Rights?: The Politics of Eugenic Abortion in Modern Japan. Amsterdam: Amsterdam UP.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kurihara, C (2007) 子どもを対象者とする研究の倫理：序論. Clin Eval 34(1): 103–122.Google ScholarPubMed
Lock, M (2001) Twice Dead: Organ Transplants and the Reinvention of Death. Berkeley: University of California Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Koseisho, KH (2000) 死における脳死判定基準. 日医雑誌, 124(11): 1623–1657.Google Scholar
Kuboyama, K, et al (2000) 300 日以上脳死状態が持続した幼児の１例. 日本救急医学会雑誌, 11(7): 338–344.Google Scholar
Machino, S (2000) 臓器移植の法的事項に関する研究. www.lifestudi-es.org/jp/machino02.htm.Google Scholar
Morioka, M (2001) Reconsidering brain death: a lesson from Japan’s fifteen years of experience. Hastings Center Report 31(4): 41–46.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Morioka, M (in press) Bioethics in the Japanese Context.Google Scholar
Morioka, M, Sugimoto, T (2001) A proposal for revision of the organ transplantation law based on a child donor’s prior declaration. Eubios Journal of Asian and International Bioethics, 11: 108–110.Google Scholar
Potts, M, Byrne, PA, Nilges, R (eds) (2000) Beyond Brain Death: The Case Against Brain Based Criteria for Human Death. Dordrecht: Kluwer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
President’s Council on Bioethics (2008) Controversies in the Determination of Death: A White Paper of the President’s Council on Bioethics. www.bioethics.gov.Google Scholar
Ropper, AH (1984) Unusual Spontaneous Movements in Brain-dead Patients. Neurology, 34: 1089–1092.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Shewmon, DA (1988) Chronic “brain death”: Meta-analysis and conceptual concequences. Neurology, 51: 1538–1545.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Singer, P (1993) Practical Ethics. Cambridge: Cambridge UP.Google Scholar
Younger, SJ, Arnold, RM (eds) (1999) The Definition of Death: Contemporary Controversies. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins UP.Google Scholar
Zeiler, K (2009) Deadly pluralism? why death-concept, death-definition, death-criterion and death-test pluralism should be allowed, even though it creates some problems. Bioethics, 23(8): 450–459.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed