brain death

My next theme of bioethics assignments is about the problem of brain death and organ transplants. This kind of issue is over my head.　And my English skill is not enough to write this theme. I'll write a little part of my thinking.

Checking for the heartbeat, the breathing, the size of the pupils(doukou), a doctor decides the death of a patient.

However, even if the patient's lungs or heart doesn't work, it is normal to keep them working by medical instruments. And, in that cases, the doctor or the relatives assume the patient is still living.

But, in the case of crucial brain damage, even if the patient's lungs and heart still work well by medical instruments, the doctor can assume the patient as brain death. Because every organ is controlled by the brain. So, brain death could be equal to the end of organism. The relatives will be forced to make a decision when to stop the medical instruments.

In the case of brain death, the body can become resource of other patients who suffer from organ failure. Organ transplants is the more fresh, the better. It will be too hard for relatives to accept brain death and organ transplants at the same time.



As for me, I refuse any life-sustaining medical treatment. And I don't care what happens to my body after my brain death. It is OK to feed my body to hyena. I would rather be eaten than be burned. I want to be sort of nutrition in nature.

But I never ask my family to do that. Because I know nobody accepts my thinking. It is far from our custom and culture. So, it must be to respect the will of the surviving-people. Only surviving-people have to get over the grief. It doesn't any matter what the dead thinks in his/her living.



Get back to organ transplants, the most important thing is what the bereaved family want to after the brain death of their family. In our custom and culture, still there is a important meaning in the body of the dead. For the family, the body is not resource.

Thank you for reading.

biological clock

I studied today about circadian rhythm in physiology.

Do you know how long horse have a sleep a day?

They can do well with two hours sleep a day.

How about dolphin?

Because of lung breathing, dolphin can not fall asleep. But they have a short sleep by switching both right and left brain alternately. (What a clever system they have!)

About human being, it is a famous story that Napoleon had three hours sleep a day, and Einstein had 10 hours sleep a day. And surprisingly, even there are a record of 8.4 minutes sleeping two weeks on an average.

But, usually human have 6to8 hours sleep a day. It is important to get non-REM sleep to recover brain fatigue. (REM stands for "rapid eye movement". When eyes are moving quickly during sleep, brain works as busy as in daytime, instead of that, muscle can take a rest. Then, non-REM sleep is the opposite.)

And, almost all the global creatures (even bacteria!) have "biological clock", and there are a "circadian rhythm" which means a roughly-24-hour cycle. According to a experiment of squirrel, even after keeping a life in darkness for one month, the circadian rhythm lingers on. The rhythm keeps the time of changing rest and action, and control of body temperature and amount of hormone at the same pace.

In which part of the body is biological clock located? Ummm, I want to write about this in English but it needs tooooo specialistic term to explain. So, I'll give it up.

It was a main point of this article though. hahaha:p

Thank you for reading.

anti-paternalism

I've just finished my pepper of bioethics assignment-3. The theme was medical paternalism as mentioned before.

Almost all the assigned books were English translation version. I understood why all of the arguments were anti-paternalism. Because Western culture is based on self-identity, so it is natural for them to assert oneself to protect their rights.

As you know, the western culture has greatly affected the Japanese culture. In spite of that, we couldn't learn how to create self-identity, and we don't know how to assert ourselves. In Japan there are a lot of claimers who are an unreasonable person just arguing foolishly. Therefore, even when you claim your legitimate rights, there are some risks being regarded as an unreasonable person in our society.

In Japan, parents still make their children obey, and children rely on their parents. It is the same as the relationship of patients and doctors. If each patient can create self-identity, they will fight against doctor's paternalistic opinion. But if you are just waiting to ask your opinion, the situation won't change.

I know that a professor evaluate us highly if we wrote the right opinion related to the assigned books. But I took the risk, and I pointed out that the books were one-sided in the Western culture, and wrote that Japanese were too immature to protest paternalism.

Thank you for reading.

paternalism

I sit down to study today. Next my paper's theme is about medical paternalism. (it's too hard to write in English...but i'll just try.)

Paternalism is related to paternal authority etymologically. Generally you regard paternal counsel is good for his children. Because children have not ability enough to decide everything correctly, so usually paternal counsel is assumed a good way to lead children to be happy.

In the old days, doctors used to be assumed the same as father for the patient. Because doctors make the best decision for the live of patient.
But in recent years, it becomes a big problem if doctors see their patient as their children. Of course, doctors have mach more expert knowledge than the patient. But individual value of patients are extremely diverse. There are high possibility that doctors impose hard medical cure in the hospital to the patient for living long.
But the patient might hope to live with his/her family at home until end of life.

So, paternalism means to invade patient's identity. Doctors have to regard the patient's opinion as important. And doctors have to make opportunities for communicating with the patient, and give the patient "informed consent".

But there are some problem. Usually doctors must impose a cure to the patient whenever doctors regarded as the patient could not make a decision rightly. For example, even if an alcohol addicted patient hopes to drink, doctors impose stop-drinking. The situation isn't assumed as paternalism. On the other hand, at the case of patients who suffer from cancer, it depends on each patient's decision. Because doctor regard the patient as a person who has personal integrity(identity). But it is difficult to tell the difference whether patient keep their identity or not.

I can guess what kind of identity my family have. But I can not say I know my friend's identity perfectly. And I can not say they keep their identity as usual even when they have a ill. So, if doctors or social workers or nurses need to know the patient's identity, the job will become huge task.

I know doctor have to examine a patient as a human, not just examine a illness. But we are in the rising cost of health care, isn't it idealistic theory?

Thank you for reading.

manner mode

As my bioethics assignment-1 was returned (it was 90point!), soon I've submitted my assignment-2. It was hard work, but I am glad I could organize my opinion clearly. So, I was going to go out somewhere if weather was nice, but unfortunately it was raining all day. Although I was not going to study today, I'll do some as I have nothing to do.

The below article is a part of my assignment of English course. The textbook is named "The Right Track", written by Agnes Chan. I will write my impressions of this last.


Unit3: Manner Mode - It's only natural.

East Japan Railway Co. made two welcome announcements recently. The company will discourage the use of portable phones on its trains, and "silver seats" (seats reserved for the elderly) will small children and disabled people can also use them. Priority seats are to be installed in all cars of JR East's regular trains.

Both of these decisions can be seen as steps toward "training" people to be more considerate, which raises the question: Are Japanese considerate or not? Here are some opinions on this subject from some of my foreign friends in Japan.

One friend from the United States commented, "Japanese do not apologize for pushing others around in train stations, and men do not free obliged to give up their seats to elderly people or pregnant women."

Littering is another sore spot. A friend from England remarked, "I went to enjoy cherry blossom viewing with some friends and was shocked at seeing the amount of litter other groups of Japanese had left behind."

Judging from these comments, one might conclude that the Japanese are a very inconsiderate people. However, the same friends have told me that they do have a lot of nice and kind Japanese friends. There seems to be a gap between how my friends feel toward Japanese as a whole and Japanese as individuals. As for me, I think Japanese are very polite when it comes to personal communication, but they can be very rude and inconsiderate when they are in a group.

One of my neighbors in an apartment where I used to live was an ardent supporter of the recycling movement. She collected cans, bottles, newspapers and milk cartons, then sent them to a place where they could be recycles.

One day whole I was driving down the ramp of a highway near my apartment, I noticed that the driver in front of me had tossed a plastic bag full of cans and rubbish out of the windows, throwing it into a bunch of bushes by the sidewalk. This made me furious, so I drove up alongside the car to give the driver a piece of my mind. But to my great surprise, it was my neighbor, the recycling enthusiast. She didn't see me, so I drove on past her, trying to figure out why she would do such a thing. Maybe she felt obliged to do the right thing in front of others, but deep down inside didn't really believe in the whole process of caring about the environment. When she felt she wasn't being watched, she didn't bother to put up a front.

I find that a lot of Japanese who live in rural areas are very considerate and kind, but that many city dwellers are inconsiderate and selfish. Many Japanese do not believe that kindness is free. The logic is, "If nobody is kind to me, why should I be kind to anyone?" Obviously, this logic is all wrong. It should be the other way round: "If I am not kind to people, why should they be kind to me?" Or, even better, "If I am good to people, people will be good to me." Or, the best logic of all, "I am kind to people just to be kind, not because I want them to be kind to me."

Being considerate must come from the heart, not from civil obligation or shame. Being considerate is not the right thing, but the natural thing for a human to do. I wish more Japanese living in cities would be as nice to strangers as they are to their friends, and that they would act the same both in front of people and behind their backs. Wouldn't it be nice if we could all be in "manner mode" all the time?

# My impression #

What she said is absolutely true. Japanese, especially those who live in city, are not polite, not kind. But it is same as other countries. Those who live in city tend to be mean to stranger because they are too busy worrying about their-self. People can not care anybody if they have no spare room in their heart. If nobody lives at own pace and they feel in rush, there are little smile in the city. At the such city, who could be kind to stranger?

leaving the opinion aside, Agnes pointed out that Japanese feel obligated to do the right thing only in front of acquaintances. YES,YES,YES! It is really famous that Japanese have two faces. When I was a junior high school student, I was worried a lot about this. I could not understand why girl really want that everybody think her a nice person. I though it was impossible for her. That's why Japanese tend to be two-faced person, I though. Everybody has both good and bad aspects. If they struggle to be nice person for everyone, their mind would be broken. I don't mean we don't care people's mind, but we should not act over thinking what someone think about us. I believe someone understand me if I try to be on the right track. So we don't have to feel obligated for everything. And if we have a plenty of spare room in our heart, we could be kind to everyone naturally. I think so.

Thank you for reading.

reproductive technology

It's already May!!! Where had my April gone? I'm a little bit behind the schedule of my assignments. I have to speed up my work.

I started bioethics assignment-2. Although I don't know yet whether assignment-1 passed or not, I'm going to write with wishful thinking.

The title of the short thesis is about issue of reproductive technology. There are many opinions about reproducing babies with new technology. First of all, I have to understand some different type of view, such as view of legal, view of ethical, and view of human rights.

These views will work to create new my thought. But I want to think first about view of sacred. Whenever thinking over childbirth, I feel sacred. Because, there are some risk of the life for both mother and baby, and there are big moment the baby can start new own life.

In my opinion, it is most important we feel sacred about childbirth. So, whatever technology advance, top priority for birth is to save mother's life and to protect baby's right. Especially it is very big issue that the baby will face an identity crisis. I want to pay the most attention to the baby's life.

I mean, we don't have to pay attention whether there are the rights and happy for legal parent. I think legal parent should not state human right if someone's life involve risks.

I think we have to awake philanthropism in our society. It is unhappy for us if we think we want to bring up only own babies. Babies were not born for parents. Babies are treasure of human. I want to clean out the consciousness that it is unhappy for married couple if they don't have own babies.

So, my bottom line is this. If there are husband's sperm and wife's egg and uterus together, I don't against new reproductive technologies.

Thank you for reading.

A Girl on the Throne

The below article is written by Agnes Chan who is a singer, an UNICEF ambassador, a writer and a professor. This essay named "The Right Track" is used as English course-4 textbook at my Univ. I will write down all of the article little by little to gain my comprehension, and remark my impressions of each unit last.

Unit2 : A Girl on the Throne? Why Not?

When Crown Princess Masako gave birth to a baby girl, Princess Aiko, Japan celebrated the news, with everyone joining in to welcome the new arrival.

However, because the baby was not a boy, unspoken disappointment was in the air. A boy would have been second in line to the Imperial throne. But Aiko is a girl, and she is not eligible to ascend to the Imperial throne, not unless Japan revises the Imperial House Law, which states that only a male offspring can sit on the Imperial throne.

If the law remains unchanged, Masako might be under pressure to give birth to more babies until she has a son.

Some lawmakers have said they are not opposed to the possibility of having an empress in the future. But they also say more time is needed to discuss the specific issues involved.

Although I had seen the Prince and Princess several times at previous functions, I recently had the opportunity to meet and talk with them face to face. Both showed a keen interest in the affairs of the world's children. Crown Princess Masako, who was quite knowledgeable about this subject, showed genuine concern for the plight of girls in the world today. She was particularly upset to hear that two thirds of children not getting a primary education were girls.
Small gestures indicated to me that the couple are loving and kind each other and to those around them. I know they will be wonderful parents. I also believe they will be wonderful advocates of children's right and will raise Princess Aiko to become a global-minded person who can understand the pain and suffering of people everywhere.

Personally, I think it is significant that a princess was born, the public would have gone wild with celebrations. But because the Imperial baby is a girl, people are doing some hard thinking. Some must have felt disappointed and at the same time felt guilty about feeling disappointed. The issue of gender equality is uppermost in most people's minds.If the government truly wants citizens to be aware that there should be equal opportunities for both men and women, why shouldn't the Imperial baby be able to ascend the throne even if she is a girl?
Because of the nation's declining birth rate, the Japanese government has been sponsoring events and projects aimed at preaching gender tolerance. But if the Imperial system cannot shed this prejudice, how can the common people be expected to do so?

The 21st century's prosperity depends on the independence of women. The world's population will stabilize only when women are allowed to make decisions about childbirth. Poverty cannot be eliminated if women do not get paid or get credit for what they do. The people of the world will remain divided and ignorant if we do not educate our girls. Gaining equal rights is no longer a struggle just for women, but a necessity for the future of the world. Realizing the importance of this issue will be the key to the success of any country.

Japan was given a wake-up call when the little princess entered the world. Whether we in Japan turn over and go back to sleep while the world gets up and moves forward; or whether we open our eyes and take the lead in setting up a more equal society is up to all of us.

# My impression #

I heard this kind of stupid issue for the first time. Is this a true story? Why does Agnes know that Japanese people were disappointed at the news which Prencess Masako give birth to a baby girl. She said that "unspoken disappointment" was in the air. If so, how could she know Japanese people's minds without listening.

Those who have an objection is minority. Almost all the people celebrated the birth of Aiko sincerely. Also Koizumi party which is a regime in those days tried to change the Imperial House Law. However Prince Akishino, who is the second son of the Emperor, had a boy after Aiko was born, so the decision was postponed. The fact of which there are tenth Emperor of eight female is recorded in Japanese history. I think Agnes shouldn't have published this personal opinion as Japanese opinion. I am sure person who persist in only descendants in the male line are person involved such as noble of men. Most of the Japanese don't care at all whether the male line or female line ascend the throne.

And I think young generation don't need Emperor's family to our symbol. They are just part of citizen like us. So the points which Agnes suggested is not reasonable. We would not think over about women's rights through the imperial succession. Now, more women than men are energetic in Japan. Women will get their own rights by herself.

keep going

What a relief! I've almost finished my first assignment of my 3rd year semester. It was scheduled to submit on 15 April, so I will make a good start! The assignment is bioethics. To get the course credits, I have to submit four short theses and take one examination. So, I've still only finished one fourth of them.

However I am still in a hurry because I am going to take two quizzes of psychiatric medicine. But it is not serious as I can try it again the day after the failed quizzes. Although I will be unable to gain a good mark, I have to at least try to fulfill my schedule.

Oh, I have one more good thing. It has just passed one month today since I started this blog. I didn't have confidence that I would keep a diary in English every day. So, this site has not been set to do the ping of update to the main blog site. I am not only lacked of confidence to keep the update, but also afraid to expose poor English. And I also think like that, "Who would read my boring diary???" But it might be a time to inform to the main site.

Not "halves" but "doubles"

The below article is written by Agnes Chan who is a singer, an UNICEF ambassador, a writer and a professor. This essay named "The Right Track" is used as English course-4 textbook at my Univ. I will write down all of the article little by little to gain my comprehension, and remark my impressions of each unit last.

Unit 1: Not "halves" but "doubles"
I recently watched a television program whose theme was "children born to parents of different races or nationalities." It featured people who are opposed to international marriages because they believe that children born to these parents suffer bullying and other hardships.
Discrimination arises from ignorance, fear and the need to feel superior to　others. We have to teach our children to respect one another and to be kind to all people, regardless of racial differences. We adults must be careful not to discriminate against other cultures ourselves. Children will adopt our attitudes. And prejudice, once planted, is hard to root out.
Japan is not the only country that gives children of mixed heritages a hard time, but because being foreign is still rare in most Japanese schools, "halves" are an easy target. However, as many people on the TV program pointed out, "halves" are actually "doubles", because they are exposed to two different countries. Many of these children are bilingual, and they have more than one place to call home. In this global world, this "extra" background definitely gives them an edge in having a wider range of choices. But I can also understand how difficult it is for a person who is young and self-conscious to be seen as "different" and an "outsider."
If mixed-race children are made to feel unwanted by their peers, they must turn to their families for spiritual support. Their parents must teach them not only to accept the hard facts of life, but also to feel proud of　themselves as individuals. These children should be given every opportunity to "feel natural" by forming friendships outside of school and in more "international" circles. They must know that being different is not a　disadvantage at all, but great chance, and that having a "double" background is a lot of fun.
The those on the TV show who spoke out against cross-cultural marriages pointed out that half of these unions end in divorce. Marrying a person of a different heritage raises the risk of a ruined relationship, they said, and the children born to these parents suffer the consequences. It is probably true that the risk are higher, but one must also remember that 50 percent of such marriages do work.
A successful marriage depends not on whether the husband and wife were born in the same country, but on how much they feel they belong to each other and to the family that they have set up. If you are thinking about marrying a person of a different race or from a different country, trust your heart and that of your partner. If you feel you are made for each other, do not hesitate to get married. After all, love is the best thing that can happen to us.
Still, I must admit Japan is not an easy place for foreigners to feel a sense of belonging. I hope this will change, because Japan needs more oreigners to come and boost the country's work force. Japan not only needs goodwill between newcomers and Japanese, but it also needs them to fall in love with each other so more families can be set up and more babies can be born to stop society from aging at the present alarming pace. We must understand that these families are the families of the future. As interactions between different peoples become more frequent and more inevitable, mixed marriages will become the norm. A more open attitude toward mixed couples and their children is not a choice, but a necessity for the survival of the country.

# My impression #

I don't agree her about last paragraph. I think preventing discrimination will link to stopping the declining birthrate, but it should not be the purpose to drop the discriminatory society. Most of the Japanese think like that, most of the colored races people staying in Japan come to earn money to feed their family living in their home country.

As America is often referred to as meltingpot, the nation is ethnically and religiously diverse. But they usually make a community by themselves because there are many people of same country or same race in the U.S. They can do that because America has a huge land to share with a huge number of immigrants. So, the community can also make a mosque for Islam in even mainly Christian country.In contrast, Japan is small country, and the population is already over 100 million. I think that most of the foreigners staying in Japan want to just earn money, and go back to home country. Because they know that Japan is not a stable country to leave a offspring.

As Agnes mentioned it in the essay, discrimination arises from the need to feel superior to others. So, I think it is rare to be opposed to international marriages between white people and Japanese because Japanese think white people staying in Japan are rich. To the contrary, colored races people are regarded as poor.
Don't you think the discrimination is the same as the labor class. The white-collar workers earn good salary, but the blue-collar workers can not earn enough money regardless of their hard work. They say there is a clear correlation between poverty and crime. It might be natural that coward Japanese try to keep crime away. That means, Japanese think human being is "homo sapience" not "homo patiens". Agnes said, Japan needs work force, and needs babies. But the point of view might cause another discrimination. It is dangerous to think of foreigners as labors like a horse.

bioethics assigment 1

I know I have to get focused and devoted to my assignment, but I can't do that. I don't have enough concentration. If I start thinking about the assignment, soon something new interrupt me, such as ruminating about the past, or imagining happenings.

I've already been studying on bioethics for 5 days. First day, I just read the book, and thought over how I make the formation of the essay. And next day, I started writing the essay using some key words from the study guide as an aid. However I still can not write in even an opening sentence.

The theme is about the problem of health and illness over thinking human being as homo patiens. All of human being are those who are worried and suffered. Human is the existence who is possible to have illness any time.

The problem could be that each person not try to face to oneself in their life. I think it would be abnormal if people think to keep working is their purpose of life because we should not be like robot. Same as it, I think it is also crazy that people think to keep health is their own goal of life. It is normal that our body and mind is not always good harmoniously. It could be important that each one notice how to adjust their own mind and body everyday.