Brain Death: when a counter-intuitive definition of death, dating back to the 70s, makes specialists and families clash over it

http://edition.cnn.com/2013/12/28/health/life-support-ethics/index.html

This is just one from many situations where you get to understand that so called "post-mortem" organ donation is a veeeeeeery complicated question. Donating your organs after your death? This would be an absolute no-brainer (no pun intended). But it gets much trickier than that: you donate your vital organs UPON your death. No wonder some people came up with a much simpler definition for "next-of-kin organ donation decision". They call it "sacrifice"...

We just started digitizing the brain... This will probably not make the "brain-death" question/polemic any easier. Digitizing the brain might turn out to be some very good way to disrupt brain death, which "scientific" definition dates back to the 70s and ever since never stopped causing both specialists and families to clash over it. Some MDs just don't believe in "brain death", while some others do. But wait a minute: since when do you have to believe in some scientific stuff? Aren't you supposed to prove it instead? So many ways to die, but... I thought death was kind of unique.

Or did they clone it back to the 70s? I can't wait for 3D bioprinted organs... and, I dunno... Maybe digitizing the brain will add some real scientific stuff to that "brain-death" death thing?...