Opinions on the Legitimacy of Death Declaration by Neurological Criteria from the Perspective of 3 Abrahamic Faiths.

Abstract

Traditional criteria to identify death may not fit all circumstances. This manuscript explores religious jurisprudence to ascertain whether death declaration by neurological criteria (DDNC) is accepted as a valid method by 3 Abrahamic religious traditions ie. Islam, Judaism, and Catholicism. Among Islamic sources (order of primacy), neither the Qur’an, Sunnah as reported in Hadith, Ijma’ (scholarly consensus), nor Qiyas (precedent-based analogy) clearly describe death determination criteria. Through Ijtihad (lowest level of Shari ‘ah), 5 of 6 identified non-binding fatwa support DDNC. Faith-based medical organizations are divided. Eleven of 13 surveyed Muslim-majority countries have laws supporting DDNC. Concern exists that premature death declaration could violate the Shari’ah concept of Hifz-An-nafs (saving life). As such, DDNC remains debated in Islamic circles. Among the 3 main sources of Jewish law (Halacha), the Torah (oral and written) does not clearly define death declaration criteria. Although Talmudic interpretations of Misnah Oholot 1:6 and Gamara Hullin 21a suggest a possible justification for death determination using neurologic criteria in some conditions, the bulk of mitzvot d’rabbanan (Rabbinic Law) rejects DDNC and adheres to cardiorespiratory criteria. Lastly, Catholic Church Cannon Law and the Holy Scripture recorded in Bible does not define death determination criteria. Following the Council of Vienne, Saint Thomas’s loss of integration view has predominated. In 2000, Pope John Paul II expressed tentative and qualifid support for DDNC, however the topic remains controversial. Despite dissenting opinions in each faith, DDNC is currently accepted as valid by many Muslims and Catholics, while rejected by Judaism.