« "Recovery of birthrate" & "Revised foreign residency rule" | Main | A lull state of the stock markets »
2009/6/20 9：38
Organ transplant under conditions of "brain death"
On June 18th, the Lower House passed a bill that loosens standard for organ transplant under conditions of "brain death," ref.(>"Recognition of brain death" & "TRANSPLANT BILL, Kids can be donors: Lower House")
For decades, Japan has adopted "heart stops beating" as a death of person. And is many cases, brain death is much favorable for the sake of organ transplant.
For example, heart transplant is just the case that brain-death is suitable for surgery than heart-death.
>臓器提供、15歳未満も可能に 移植法 A案が衆院通過
> 衆院は18日の本会議で、脳死後の臓器提供の年齢制限を撤廃し、本人の意思表示がなくても家族の同意で提供を可能とする臓器移植法改正案（A案）を賛成多数で可決した。自民、民主など各党は党議拘束をかけずに各議員の判断で投票し、賛成 263票、反対167票、欠席・棄権は 48人だった。
> 同案の可決により、その他の３案は採決されずに廃案となった。1997年に成立した現行法は脳死後の臓器提供について、15歳以上で本人による提供の意思表示がある場合に限っている。
> 衆院を通過したＡ案は臓器移植を推進するため、提供者の年齢制限を撤廃し、本人が事前に拒否を表明していなければ家族の同意で提供可能とした。これまで国内ではできなかった小児の臓器移植に道を開くとともに、15歳以上の臓器提供例も増える可能性がある。
Anyway, this necessary revision had been considered for nine years at the moment of May 2006.
But it took further three years to be completed, ref.(>"Revising the Organ Transplant Law" & "Brain death transplant law hits milestone after nine years on the books")
Why did it take so much time to revise organ transplant law? The answer is that there is no social consensus that considers brain-death as a death of a human being.
Traditionally, Japanese recognized that "a soul dwells in a liver" -- this is the reason why ancient worriers of "samurai" committed suicide via "harakiri."
Nowadays, there are neither samurais nor people who believes that a soul is in a liver in Japan. A custom of "harakiri" is nothing more than past remains.
But even so, it is more acceptable for many Japanese that a soul isn't in a brain but in one of internal organs -- heart.
Even nowadays, many Japanese are reluctant to accept brain-death as a death of human beings, and so does brain-death organ transplants, ref.(>"Public mixed on brain-death transplants")
Even not only ordinary people but also majority of medical professionals hesitate to consider brain death as a death of human being, ref.(>"39% of medics see brain death as the end of life")
As the result, the number of organ transplants is low in Japan, ref.(>"Low number of organ transplants")
At glance, there is no difference between "brain-death" and "sleep." It seems that he or she wakes up at any moment and stands up abruptly.
So it is understandable that bereaved are reluctant to agree that organs of their family member are used for the sake of organ transplant under conditions of brain-death.
But from the medical and scientific standpoint, there is a clear difference between the earlier and the later. The death is a death, not sleep.
Indeed, the argument that has drifted for more than a decade is finally nearing a goal, ref.(>"Over 80% of lawmakers support revising organ transplant law.")
But when it comes to details of the revise, to make concord among both lawmakers and nationals is really difficult.
As Japan doesn't have a tradition to consider brain-death as a death of a human being, it is really difficult to make >"Consensus on organ transplants."
Indeed, there were 4 plans considered by them even at the final stage of the Diet deliberation and voting, ref.(>"Calls to revise organ law grow as lawmakers debate various plans")
In particular, the largest central issue of the revise is whether organ harvesting from children should be tolerated or not under conditions of consent by parents, ref.(>"Bill would allow organ harvesting from children with parental OK")
First of all, some argue that "there are some cases that corpses once diagnosed to be brain-death recovered from dead-condition. So it is too early to recognize brain-death as a death of human beings."
It has a point. There is no "absolute" in any matters so that diagnoses of brain-death must be wrong even though in rare cases.
But how about "heart-death"? Is diagnose of a death based on heart beating perfect? I disagree. In considerable number of cases, people returns from death with heart massage.
It is irrational logic to make only brain-death as unreliable. Frankly say, medicine always comes together with some uncertainty and accident.
In addition, how about the number of lives that could've been saved if Japan had approved organ transplant under conditions of brain-death?
There is no doubt that the number must be much larger than possible deaths via wrong diagnosis of brain death. It is a simple problem of arithmetic, isn't it?
Second, Japan must care about its international reputation. If domestic organ transplant surgery is impossible, patients and their relatives are forced to go abroad to be treated.
As donors of organs are short-supply continuously that many patients are on the long waiting lines.
The more Japanese interrupt that lines, the more local patients have to wait longer. So such kind of "organ buying trips" damage Japan's national reputation.
In particular, there is no hope for child patients in Japan unless they go abroad. Do people who oppose organ transplant under conditions of brain-death want to say "die" to such children?
Even though I have no medical-expertise, it seems to me that the latest revision is rational, or rather too late.
At least, there is no doubt that it must be a good news for patients and their relatives who have looked forward to a revision for a long time.
For your ref.>Universal organ donorship
>TRANSPLANT LAW AGE MINIMUM AXED, Kids under 15 can give organs
0
For decades, Japan has adopted "heart stops beating" as a death of person. And is many cases, brain death is much favorable for the sake of organ transplant.
For example, heart transplant is just the case that brain-death is suitable for surgery than heart-death.
>臓器提供、15歳未満も可能に 移植法 A案が衆院通過
> 衆院は18日の本会議で、脳死後の臓器提供の年齢制限を撤廃し、本人の意思表示がなくても家族の同意で提供を可能とする臓器移植法改正案（A案）を賛成多数で可決した。自民、民主など各党は党議拘束をかけずに各議員の判断で投票し、賛成 263票、反対167票、欠席・棄権は 48人だった。
> 同案の可決により、その他の３案は採決されずに廃案となった。1997年に成立した現行法は脳死後の臓器提供について、15歳以上で本人による提供の意思表示がある場合に限っている。
> 衆院を通過したＡ案は臓器移植を推進するため、提供者の年齢制限を撤廃し、本人が事前に拒否を表明していなければ家族の同意で提供可能とした。これまで国内ではできなかった小児の臓器移植に道を開くとともに、15歳以上の臓器提供例も増える可能性がある。
Anyway, this necessary revision had been considered for nine years at the moment of May 2006.
But it took further three years to be completed, ref.(>"Revising the Organ Transplant Law" & "Brain death transplant law hits milestone after nine years on the books")
Why did it take so much time to revise organ transplant law? The answer is that there is no social consensus that considers brain-death as a death of a human being.
Traditionally, Japanese recognized that "a soul dwells in a liver" -- this is the reason why ancient worriers of "samurai" committed suicide via "harakiri."
Nowadays, there are neither samurais nor people who believes that a soul is in a liver in Japan. A custom of "harakiri" is nothing more than past remains.
But even so, it is more acceptable for many Japanese that a soul isn't in a brain but in one of internal organs -- heart.
Even nowadays, many Japanese are reluctant to accept brain-death as a death of human beings, and so does brain-death organ transplants, ref.(>"Public mixed on brain-death transplants")
Even not only ordinary people but also majority of medical professionals hesitate to consider brain death as a death of human being, ref.(>"39% of medics see brain death as the end of life")
As the result, the number of organ transplants is low in Japan, ref.(>"Low number of organ transplants")
At glance, there is no difference between "brain-death" and "sleep." It seems that he or she wakes up at any moment and stands up abruptly.
So it is understandable that bereaved are reluctant to agree that organs of their family member are used for the sake of organ transplant under conditions of brain-death.
But from the medical and scientific standpoint, there is a clear difference between the earlier and the later. The death is a death, not sleep.
Indeed, the argument that has drifted for more than a decade is finally nearing a goal, ref.(>"Over 80% of lawmakers support revising organ transplant law.")
But when it comes to details of the revise, to make concord among both lawmakers and nationals is really difficult.
As Japan doesn't have a tradition to consider brain-death as a death of a human being, it is really difficult to make >"Consensus on organ transplants."
Indeed, there were 4 plans considered by them even at the final stage of the Diet deliberation and voting, ref.(>"Calls to revise organ law grow as lawmakers debate various plans")
In particular, the largest central issue of the revise is whether organ harvesting from children should be tolerated or not under conditions of consent by parents, ref.(>"Bill would allow organ harvesting from children with parental OK")
First of all, some argue that "there are some cases that corpses once diagnosed to be brain-death recovered from dead-condition. So it is too early to recognize brain-death as a death of human beings."
It has a point. There is no "absolute" in any matters so that diagnoses of brain-death must be wrong even though in rare cases.
But how about "heart-death"? Is diagnose of a death based on heart beating perfect? I disagree. In considerable number of cases, people returns from death with heart massage.
It is irrational logic to make only brain-death as unreliable. Frankly say, medicine always comes together with some uncertainty and accident.
In addition, how about the number of lives that could've been saved if Japan had approved organ transplant under conditions of brain-death?
There is no doubt that the number must be much larger than possible deaths via wrong diagnosis of brain death. It is a simple problem of arithmetic, isn't it?
Second, Japan must care about its international reputation. If domestic organ transplant surgery is impossible, patients and their relatives are forced to go abroad to be treated.
As donors of organs are short-supply continuously that many patients are on the long waiting lines.
The more Japanese interrupt that lines, the more local patients have to wait longer. So such kind of "organ buying trips" damage Japan's national reputation.
In particular, there is no hope for child patients in Japan unless they go abroad. Do people who oppose organ transplant under conditions of brain-death want to say "die" to such children?
Even though I have no medical-expertise, it seems to me that the latest revision is rational, or rather too late.
At least, there is no doubt that it must be a good news for patients and their relatives who have looked forward to a revision for a long time.
For your ref.>Universal organ donorship
>TRANSPLANT LAW AGE MINIMUM AXED, Kids under 15 can give organs
0
