Abstract

The whole brain criterion of death has been the subject of intense theological debate since the process of policy shaping fortheGerman transplantation law adopted in 1997. This article identifies tutiorism as the predominant argumentative strategy both for the theological defence and the rejection of a neurological criterion of death. A tutioristic argumentation fails to elucidate the very nature of the problern which is normative and tends to clarify rights and duties of all the actors involved in the clinical setting of organ transplant or withdrawal of life sustaining therapies. A theological defence of the whole brain criterion of death has to avoid that distinctions between life and death become blurred. On the other hand, those who reject this criterion, but still support the current practice of organ transplant, have to be aware that this option is hardly compatible with most part of the moral tradition of Christianity.