In re T.A.C.P.
609 So. 2d 588 (1992)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
An individual is legally dead in Florida if they have sustained either (1) irreversible cessation of circulatory and respiratory functions (the common law cardiopulmonary standard), or (2) irreversible cessation of all functions of the entire brain, including the brain stem, when circulatory and respiratory functions are artificially maintained (the statutory 'whole-brain death' standard). Anencephaly, a congenital condition where an infant is born with a brain stem but without cerebral hemispheres, does not meet the legal definition of death.
Facts:
- The parents of T.A.C.P. were informed during the eighth month of pregnancy that their child would be born with anencephaly, a fatal condition in which the infant lacks a brain but possesses a brain stem.
- The parents decided to carry the pregnancy to term and have the mother undergo a caesarean section, hoping that their daughter's organs could be used for transplant.
- T.A.C.P. was born with an exposed brain stem and without cerebral hemispheres, meeting the medical criteria for anencephaly.
- After birth, T.A.C.P.'s heart was beating and she was breathing, demonstrating autonomic functions controlled by the brain stem.
- The parents requested that T.A.C.P. be declared legally dead to permit the donation of her organs.
- The health care providers refused the parents' request due to concerns about potential civil or criminal liability.
- T.A.C.P. survived for a few days after birth and then died.
Procedural Posture:
- The parents of T.A.C.P. filed a petition in the Florida circuit court (trial court) asking for a judicial determination that their child was legally dead.
- The trial court denied the request, ruling that Florida statutes would not permit a determination of death while the child's brain stem continued to function.
- The parents appealed to the Fourth District Court of Appeal.
- The appellate court summarily affirmed the trial court's order.
- The Fourth District Court of Appeal then certified the trial court's order to the Supreme Court of Florida as a matter of great public importance requiring immediate resolution.
- The Supreme Court of Florida accepted jurisdiction to review the case.
Premium Content
Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief
You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture
Issue:
Is an anencephalic newborn with a functioning brain stem considered legally "dead" for purposes of organ donation solely by reason of its congenital deformity?
Opinions:
Majority - Kogan, Justice
No, an anencephalic newborn is not considered dead solely by reason of its congenital deformity. Florida law recognizes two standards for death: the common law cardiopulmonary standard (irreversible cessation of heart and lung function) and the statutory whole-brain death standard for patients on artificial life support (irreversible cessation of all brain function, including the brain stem). T.A.C.P. did not meet either definition, as her heart and lungs were functioning. The Court declined to create a new common law definition of death for anencephalics, reasoning that such a significant change is unwarranted without a clear public necessity and broad consensus in the medical, ethical, and legal communities. The Court noted the significant controversy regarding the utility of organs from anencephalic infants and the 'slippery slope' problem of devaluing the lives of other cognitively impaired individuals.
Analysis:
This case solidifies the legal definition of death in Florida, explicitly rejecting the creation of a special category for anencephalic infants. The decision exemplifies judicial restraint, placing the responsibility for resolving complex bioethical dilemmas on the legislature rather than the courts. It underscores that fundamental common law principles, such as the definition of life, will not be altered by the judiciary without a compelling public necessity and widespread societal consensus. The ruling signals that any expansion of the definition of death to include conditions like anencephaly must come through the legislative process.
