In recent months, we have been called into an alarming number of cases where families were forced to fight for the lives of their loved ones—many of them young, some just children—after hospitals rushed to declare them “brain dead.”
In each of these heartbreaking situations, doctors were quick to pronounce death—not based on final certainty, but on protocols that now require less evidence, less time, and less compassion. Families were pressured, even berated, when they asked for more time or dared to hope that their loved ones could make any kind of recovery.
These cases are becoming even more difficult to navigate because the very standards for determining brain death have changed. Ironically, the changes stem in part from our own legal victories—cases where Life Legal successfully challenged premature and unjust brain death declarations. In response to our lawsuits, the American Academy of Neurology revised its brain death guidelines in 2023, but not for the better. Instead of raising the bar for such life-and-death decisions, the new rules lower it—making it easier for hospitals to declare patients dead and move on.
For example, the guidelines now use the term “permanent” rather than “irreversible” to describe the severity of brain injury necessary to determine brain death. Whereas “irreversible” means an injury that cannot be reversed, “permanent” is defined as an injury that “will not resume spontaneously” and “medical interventions will not be used to attempt restoration of function.” This means that even if a patient could recover brain function with medical intervention, such intervention will not be provided once brain “death” is suspected. This is like saying, we will declare people dead if a heartbeat does not resume spontaneously – and we will not provide CPR or other interventions to restore the heartbeat.
While the new guidelines recommend two brain death exams to avoid “false positives,” they only require one brain death exam. In the case of a 20-year-old who went into cardiac arrest after his potassium levels plummeted, the family begged for a second exam, but the hospital refused, insisting that one exam was sufficient. One test. One signature. One death certificate. And with that, the door slammed shut on any chance of seeking further treatment elsewhere.
But not every story ends this way.
Doctors Said He Was Brain Dead. Two Weeks Later, He Was Talking.
One man—who doctors insisted was brain dead—was nearly taken off life support. His family, devastated but not convinced, insisted on more time. Two weeks later, the “brain dead” patient was talking. He has not completely recovered, but he is alive today because his family refused to surrender to a rushed and irreversible decision. They were right. The doctors were wrong.
This is not a miracle. It is a misdiagnosis—one that would have cost him his life.
And it would have cost Mariana hers, too.
Mariana suffered a brain injury last year and the hospital rushed to do an “apnea” test. During this test, patients are taken off the ventilator for up to 15 minutes to see if they will start breathing spontaneously. Mariana did not take a breath during the first exam. The hospital then did a second exam, and she took a breath, which means she is not brain dead. If the hospital had made the determination based on a single brain death exam, Mariana would have been forcibly removed from life support, ending her life. Because Life Legal intervened and prevented the hospital from issuing a death certificate, Mariana was transferred to long-term care. Today, she is still alive and slowly recovering. Without that second test, she would be gone.
In many cases, the decision to rush a brain death declaration is colored by the patient’s organ donor status. In one Nevada case, the hospital informed us that because the patient was a registered organ donor, the patient’s medical team was no longer involved in decisions about care and treatment. Even the patient’s wife could not override the checkmark made by the patient when he had renewed his driver’s license years earlier.
In essence, the organ donor company “owned” the patient and the patient’s family was left powerless. They were forced to acquiesce to withdrawing life-sustaining treatment just days after the young man was injured. Their loved one was treated as little more than a collection of spare parts.
This is why we strongly urge people not to sign up for organ donation in advance. Instead, name a trusted healthcare agent who can make those decisions in real time—someone who knows your values, your story, and your wishes, and your actual condition.
The above are not isolated incidents—they are part of a growing and deeply troubling trend that treats vulnerable patients as disposable. Life Legal is one of the few organizations in the country fighting back against the systematic stripping away of family rights in critical care settings.
But we can’t do this without you.
Your prayers and your financial support allow us to uphold the dignity of every human life, and challenge protocols that place efficiency above ethics and patient care. Because of you, Mariana is alive. Because of you, families are not alone in their darkest hour. If these stories move your heart, please consider making a gift today to help us defend the sacred dignity of every human life.
From the bottom of our hearts—thank you for standing with us.