Social Attitudes Towards the Latest Legislation on Brain Death

  • S. Salaçin
  • M. K. Gülmen
  • B. Alper
  • N. Çekin
  • L. Kellece
Conference paper


The first organ donation law in Turkey came out in 1979 (Act.Nr.2238), and was revised in 1982 (Act.Nr.17727). The new legislation on Organ Transplantation Centres came out as Act Nr.21674, on August 20th 1993. The appendix of this act defined the criteria of brainstem death as brain-death, and legally accepted death. The last paragraph of this section describes the procedure for organ donation in brain death-patients as follows; (if the relatives of a brain-death patient, disapprove of organ donation, life-sustaining treatments will be withdrawn.). In this study, we try to investigate the social attitudes towards the concept of brainstem death and the new regulation on consent procedures for post mortem organ donations.


Organ Donation Brain Death Consent Procedure Ethical Attitude Medical Futility 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Abbing R.H.D.C. Transplantation of organs: A European Perspective. Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics, 21 (1): 54–58, 1993.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Miles S.H., Medical Futility. Law, Medicine and Health Care, 20: 310–315, 1992.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Rouse F., Advance Directives: Where Are We Heading after Cruzan? Law, Medicine and Health Care. 18: 353–359, 1990.Google Scholar
  4. Miller T.E., Public Policy In the Wake of Cruzan: A case Study of NewYork’s Health Care Proxy Law. 18: 360–367, 1990.Google Scholar
  5. 4.
    McKnight D.K., Bellis M., Foregoing Life-sustaining Treatment for Adult, Developmentally Disabled, Public Wards: A proposed Statute. American Journal of Law and Medicine. XVIII: 203–232, 1992.Google Scholar
  6. 5.
    Link J. Concept and Diagnosis of Brain-death. Meeting of the International Association of Forensic Sciences, Düsseldorf, Germany, 22–28 August 1993.Google Scholar
  7. 6.
    de Wachter M.A.M. Active Euthanasia in the Netherlands. JAMA, 262 (23): 3316–3319, 1989.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 7.
    Youngner S.J., Landefeld C.S., Coulton C.J., Juknialis B.W., Leary M. ‘Brain Death’ and Organ Retrieval. A Cross-sectional Survey of Knowledge and Concepts Among Health Professionals. JAMA, 261 (15): 2205–2210, 1989.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 8.
    Mason J.K., McCall Smith R.A. The diagnosis of death. Chapter 13, pp 289–299, in Law and Medical Ethics. Third Edition, 1991, Butterworths. London, Dublin, Edinburgh.Google Scholar
  10. 9.
    Wanzer S.H., Federman D.D., Adelstein S.J., Cassel C.K., Cassem E.H., Cranford R.E., et al. The Physician’s Responsibility Toward Hopelessly Ill Patients. A Second Look. N Engl J Med. 320: 844–849, 1989.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 10.
    Brody B., Special Ethical Issues in the Management of PVS Patients. Law, Medicine and Health Care, 20: 104–115, 1992Google Scholar
  12. 11.
    Kurosu M., Haseba T., Ohno Y. Is Brain Death Actual Death Medically Speaking? Opinions of Physicians and Medical or Biological Scientists in Japan. Meeting of the International Association of Forensic Sciences, Düsseldorf, Germany, 22–28 August 1993.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1995

Authors and Affiliations

  • S. Salaçin
    • 1
    • 2
  • M. K. Gülmen
    • 1
  • B. Alper
    • 1
  • N. Çekin
    • 1
  • L. Kellece
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Forensic MedicineMedical School of Çukurova UniversityAdanaTurkey
  2. 2.Dept. of Forensic MedicineÇukurova University, Medical SchoolBalcalì, AdanaTurkey

Personalised recommendations