A viewpoint from Harvard Medical School believes that biologically there are brain death, brain stem death, cerebrum death and new cortex death at different anatomical levels. The brain stem dominates fundamental life characteristics while the cerebrum and new cortex control advanced neural activities and consciousness. In the latter cases, patients may sometimes revive. Hence, general cases could be treated in clinical practice according to the earlier classification of stages of death. While for special cases, in which the brain functions are involved, the new classification would be preferred.
Some people believe that it is worthless to discuss euthanasia because it is too early to do so.
The discussion should be held on the premise of the legalization or confirmation of brain death. In discussion of euthanasia we used to regard the patient experiencing brain death as one kind of euthanasia, taking it into account that the concept and criterion have just been introduced into China, and the need for greater awareness. However, there are thousands of patients who are brain dead, and whose illness has exhausted their relatives, doctors and also the whole of society. Thus for the time being, in the cause of life-end medicine, brain death has been admitted to the theoretical discussion concerning euthanasia, which is improper but merely a makeshift. Cognitively, we should always make it clear that the brain dead should be excluded from the object and scope of euthanasia that we are now discussing and determining.