The ethical & legal issues concerning brain-dead pregnant women are evaluated, arguing that they are better off as cadaver organ donors than as either seriously impaired patients or as incubators for the fetus. This third option (between considering the woman as a living interests-bearing person & a dead object with no obligations toward her) involves a less rigorous consent process, yet guarantees the woman legal claims concerning future disposition of her deceased body. In Incubators and Organ Donors, Jacqueline J. Glover (George Washington U, Washington, DC, 20052) rejects the cadaver organ donor model, suggesting that it oversimplifies complex moral questions without questioning the brain death-bodily death equation. After discussing difficulties with the brain dead's ability for self-determination, a family-centered model is proposed that highlights the maternal-fetal relationship with a decision largely dependent on family input. In Have We Lost Our Senses? Problems with Maintaining Brain-Dead Bodies Carrying Fetuses, Joel E. Frader (U of Pittsburgh, PA 15260) criticizes Kantor & Hoskins for sustaining the confusion surrounding the identification of bodily death with brain death. The technological tyranny that allows the manipulation of physiology runs contrary to good sense or wholesomeness. In Clinical Management of Brain Death during Pregnancy, Frank A. Chervenak (New York Hospital-Cornell Medical Center, NY) & Laurence B. McCullough note that while their arguments against the incubator model are insufficient, Kantor's & Hoskins's approach to prolonged, maternal cardiorespiratory maintenance of the brain-dead gestating mother for fetal benefit is original & clinically useful, but also experimental & subject to institutional regulation. J. Sadler