ABSTRACT
The Harvard Report of 1968 implicitly confused ventilation after brain death with the prolongation of life. Criteria for brain death are ethically necessary because it is possible to maintain organs alive in a cadaver when integrated life has ceased to be possible. A clear-cut distinction between brain death and the vegetative state is extremely important when reaching decisions regarding the viability of the foetus. Maternal brain death highlights the significance of a clearly formulated definition of death as an event to be distinguished from the vegetative state, often referred to by philosophers and lay-persons as a ‘lingering death’. The possibility of maintaining the circulation for a while after brain death has given rise to ethical concern regarding the employment of cadavers as organ banks. Korein is obviously in favour of discontinuing ventilation or cardio-vascular support after brain death.
