Matthieu Le Dorze, Armelle Nicolas-Robin, Sarah Carvallo, Milena Maglio, Alberto Molina-Pérez
Death determination should not be understood or taught solely as the application of criteria and protocols. Making explicit in critical care education the scientific limits, implicit assumptions, and context-dependent clinical judgement involved in determining and declaring death may help clinicians better assume this responsibility, improve communication with families, and sustain public trust in end-of-life care and organ donation.
BACKGROUND: In clinical practice, death determination-a core responsibility of critical care clinicians-is commonly taught as the technical application of standardized medical and legal criteria. However, contemporary practices, including resuscitation, death determination by neurological criteria, withdrawal of life-sustaining treatment, and controlled donation after circulatory determination of death, show that determining death also requires interpretative and performative, context-dependent clinical judgement operating within persistent scientific limits and implicit assumptions about human life and its end.
MAIN BODY: Using a single illustrative clinical scenario followed across four trajectories-obvious death, cardiac arrest and resuscitation, death determined by neurological criteria, and circulatory death following withdrawal of life-sustaining treatment-we examine how death determination operates at the intersection of medical criteria, clinical judgement, scientific limits, and implicit assumptions. Particular uncertainties concern the relationships between circulation, cerebral perfusion, and brain function; the distinction between complete and partial loss of brain function; the distinction between permanent and irreversible loss; and the prediction of neurological recovery, acceptable functional outcome, and meaningful life. These uncertainties are managed differently across clinical contexts. Across these contexts, clinicians do not simply observe a discrete biological event: they interpret an evolving process of dying within established medical and legal frameworks. The declaration of death is therefore also performative, transforming the patient's medical, legal, and social status.
CONCLUSION: Death determination should not be understood or taught solely as the application of criteria and protocols. Making explicit in critical care education the scientific limits, implicit assumptions, and context-dependent clinical judgement involved in determining and declaring death may help clinicians better assume this responsibility, improve communication with families, and sustain public trust in end-of-life care and organ donation.