Statement in Support of Revising the Uniform Determination of Death Act and in Opposition to a Proposed Revision.

The article critically examines proposed revisions to the Uniform Determination of Death Act (UDDA), focusing on the revision by Lewis, Bonnie, and Pope (the RUDDA), which seeks to legally endorse current adult and pediatric brain death (BD) diagnostic guidelines, exclude hypothalamic function from brain function, and permit apnea testing without consent. A diverse group of 107 experts in medicine, bioethics, philosophy, and law argue that while the UDDA requires revision, the RUDDA is inadequate because the Guidelines carry a significant risk of false-positive BD diagnoses, hypothalamic function is integral to organismal life, and the apnea test is risky, non-beneficial, and ethically requires informed consent. The article also highlights that objections to the neurological criterion of death extend beyond religious grounds, advocating for an opt-out clause allowing individuals to choose a circulatory-respiratory criterion of death. Overall, it calls for a more fundamental reconsideration of death definitions and legal standards than that proposed by the RUDDA.