- New
-
Topics
- All Categories
- Metaphysics and Epistemology
- Value Theory
- Science, Logic, and Mathematics
- Science, Logic, and Mathematics
- Logic and Philosophy of Logic
- Philosophy of Biology
- Philosophy of Cognitive Science
- Philosophy of Computing and Information
- Philosophy of Mathematics
- Philosophy of Physical Science
- Philosophy of Social Science
- Philosophy of Probability
- General Philosophy of Science
- Philosophy of Science, Misc
- History of Western Philosophy
- Philosophical Traditions
- Philosophy, Misc
- Other Academic Areas
- Journals
- Submit material
- More
The dead donor rule: True by definition
American Journal of Bioethics 3 (1):10 – 11 (2003)
Abstract
This Article does not have an abstractOther Versions
No versions found
My notes
Similar books and articles
The dead donor rule: Not dead yet.Laura A. Siminoff - 2003 - American Journal of Bioethics 3 (1):30.
Respect for donor autonomy and the dead donor rule.Wayne Shelton - 2003 - American Journal of Bioethics 3 (1):20 – 21.
"Dead donor" versus "respect for donor" rule: Putting the cart before the horse.D. Micah Hester - 2003 - American Journal of Bioethics 3 (1):24 – 26.
The theoretical and practical importance of the dead donor rule.James J. McCartney - 2003 - American Journal of Bioethics 3 (1):15 – 16.
Social pressure and organ harvesting via a dead donor rule.Timothy Lillie - 2003 - American Journal of Bioethics 3 (1):28.
The Dead Donor Rule Does Require that the Donor is Dead.Lainie Ross - 2023 - American Journal of Bioethics 23 (2):12-14.
Not Dead, but Close Enough? You Cannot Have Your Cake and Eat It Too in Satisfying the DDR in cDCD.Brendan Parent & Tamar Schiff - 2023 - American Journal of Bioethics 23 (2):22-24.
Does the respect for donor rule respect the donor?Denise M. Dudzinski - 2003 - American Journal of Bioethics 3 (1):23 – 24.
Does Controlled Donation after Circulatory Death Violate the Dead Donor Rule?Emil J. Nielsen Busch & Marius T. Mjaaland - 2022 - American Journal of Bioethics 23 (2):4-11.
Almagest Again? An Epistemological Critique of Nielsen Busch and Mjaaland.David Kaufman, Michael J. Nabozny & Margie Hodges Shaw - 2023 - American Journal of Bioethics 23 (2):33-35.
Analytics
Added to PP
2009-01-28
Downloads
47 (#472,652)
6 months
9 (#502,853)
2009-01-28
Downloads
47 (#472,652)
6 months
9 (#502,853)
Historical graph of downloads
Citations of this work
Brain Death — Too Flawed to Endure, Too Ingrained to Abandon.Robert D. Truog - 2007 - Journal of Law, Medicine and Ethics 35 (2):273-281.
The death of whole-brain death: The plague of the disaggregators, somaticists, and mentalists.Robert M. Veatch - 2005 - Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 30 (4):353 – 378.
Recovery of transplantable organs after cardiac or circulatory death: Transforming the paradigm for the ethics of organ donation.Joseph L. Verheijde, Mohamed Y. Rady & Joan McGregor - 2007 - Philosophy, Ethics, and Humanities in Medicine 2:8-.
What We Argue About When We Argue About Death.Sean Aas - 2024 - Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 49 (4):399-413.
Good and not so good medical ethics.Rosamond Rhodes - 2015 - Journal of Medical Ethics 41 (1):71-74.
References found in this work
The brain and somatic integration: Insights into the standard biological rationale for equating brain death with death.D. Alan Shewmon - 2001 - Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 26 (5):457 – 478.
The dead donor rule and the concept of death: Severing the ties that bind them.Elysa R. Koppelman - 2003 - American Journal of Bioethics 3 (1):1 – 9.
PhilPapers logo by Andrea Andrews and Meghan Driscoll.
This site uses cookies and Google Analytics (see our terms & conditions for details regarding the privacy implications). Use of this site is subject to terms & conditions.
All rights reserved by The PhilPapers Foundation
Server: philpapers-web-667477cd97-lv8mh dc2