Can we agree that one part of the population has been dealt with in the above statement?
I guess I don't see how that's the case. Could you elaborate?
Another seqment, for example, Jehovahs Witnesses, might conclude this too - that the person is wrapped up in their organs
Sure. And we allow the kin of certain individuals, who are JW's, to dispose of the remains of those individuals according to their own conscience.
Why can't the same thing apply here? If all the kin and professionals agree that this person is dead, surely they can dispose of the remains according to their own conscience? Why should they be limited by the differing beliefs of others? We don't limit the JW's; we don't force them to surrender their dead for organ extraction, because we recognize that they have differing beliefs about the end of life.
I get that people disagree about what constitutes a person. I just don't see where, in your implication, there's a basis for dictating one side of that debate to everybody.