Volume 14, Issue 1 (9-2026)
JRH 2026, 14(1): 0-0 |
Back to browse issues page
Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
Hosseini Karnami S H. Analyzing the Jurisprudential-Medical Challenges of Patients with Brain Death and Vegetative State. JRH 2026; 14 (1)
URL: http://jrh.mazums.ac.ir/article-1-1279-en.html
URL: http://jrh.mazums.ac.ir/article-1-1279-en.html
Faculty Member and Associate Professor, Mazandaran University of Medical Sciences
Abstract: (4 Views)
The determination of life or death status in cases of “complete brain death” and “persistent vegetative state” is among the emerging and complex issues in medical jurisprudence. Due to the lack of direct precedent in classical jurisprudential texts, it requires investigation and ijtihād (independent legal reasoning) based on contemporary medical findings. Accurate diagnosis of these conditions forms the foundation for deriving a wide range of Sharī‘ah rulings, including the permissibility of withdrawing life-support systems, the feasibility of organ transplantation, rulings pertaining to ritual purity and burial, the cessation of religious obligations, legal and financial matters, the dissolution of marriage, and the distribution of inheritance—all of which are contingent upon determining the applicable definitions of “life” and “death.” This research, aiming at a comprehensive and comparative analysis of jurisprudential and medical perspectives on this subject, has been conducted using a descriptive-analytical method with an ijtihādī-deductive approach. The required data were gathered through a library study of jurisprudential and medical sources, as well as consultations with neuroscience specialists. Towards this objective, the medical concepts of life stages (complete, persistent vegetative, organic) and death stages (complete, higher brain, brain death) are explained and compared with the jurisprudential concepts of life (mustaqirr [stable] and ghayr mustaqirr [non-stable]) and death (cardio-pulmonary and cerebral). In this study, three main contemporary jurisprudential viewpoints are examined: 1) The majority view among jurists, who, citing specific evidence, consider a brain-dead individual alive and do not apply the rulings of the deceased to them; 2) The minority view among jurists, who consider such an individual deceased and apply all rulings pertaining to the dead; and 3) The differentiated view held by some scholars, who apply different rulings based on specific conditions. This research elucidates, critiques, and evaluates the evidence of each of these viewpoints in light of definitive medical data. The findings indicate that the theory considering a brain-dead individual to be alive holds preference, both in terms of the strength of its deductive evidence and its prevalence among contemporary jurists. It is also more consistent with the principle of precaution in preserving human life and numerous jurisprudential rules. This study is useful for researchers in the fields of jurisprudence, medical law, and bioethics, as well as the medical community, for making informed clinical and Sharī‘ah-based decisions.
Keywords: Bioethics, Brain death, Medical law, Medical jurisprudence, Persistent vegetative state, Sharī‘ah Rulings
Type of Study: Original Research |
Subject:
Islamic Feqh & Law
Send email to the article author
| Rights and permissions | |
 |
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License. |
