Nancy Cruzan 's Case Analysis

This problem first began to surface in the 1980s when the court had to face Cruzan v. Director, Missouri Department of Health. In this case the court had to decide by “clear and convincing evidence” that the comatose patient’s (Nancy Beth Cruzan) desire to terminate her life before the courts would allow her family’s wish of disconnecting her feeding tube be carried out. Unfortunately eight of nine judges said no to the proposition and concluded that the right

Working in the field as health care professionals, we are faced with ethical dilemmas almost always. Although each individual posses different values, there are specific codes of conduct to abide by, despite personal beliefs. Without the use of a structural code, individuals in the health care field would make decisions based on their own personal beliefs in accordance to their culture and religion. In the case of Marion and the pacemaker, we witness the desires of the patient at hand, Marion, and her family, be interrogated by the floor nurses. Although the intent behind the actions of the floor nurses can be described as morally just, thinking they are helping preserve the life of Marion, based on medical ethics, their behavior is of some degree to be questioned. This paper will focus on the boundaries we witness crossed by floor nurses and how they go against the medical ethics approved, and what effects they have on patients and their care givers.

Barbara Huttman’s “A Crime of Compassion” has many warrants yet the thesis is not qualified. This is a story that explains the struggles of being a nurse and having to make split-second decisions, whether they are right or wrong. Barbara was a nurse who was taking care of a cancer patient named Mac. Mac had wasted away to a 60-pound skeleton (95). When he walked into the hospital, he was a macho police officer who believed he could single-handedly protect the whole city (95). His condition worsened every day until it got so bad that he had to be resuscitated two or three times a day. Barbara eventually gave into his wishes to be let go. Do you believe we should have the right to

After declaring Jahi McMath brain dead, the doctors at the Children’s Hospital ordered her to be taken off mechanical ventilation. Her mother, Latasha Winkfield, refused to accept that her daughter was dead and incapable of recovering (du Toit & Miller, 2016). Winkfield believed her daughter was still alive because McMath was breathing and her heart was still beating (du Toit & Miller, 2016). McMath’s family disagreed with the doctors’ report and filed a lawsuit to prevent life support from being discontinued (Paola, 2014).

An emergency call came in at 9:45 am made by Doug Greene who is a neighbor of the victim Anna Garcia claiming that he had not seen Anna Garcia since her normal morning walk at 6:30 am the previous morning and that the dog had been barking for 2 hours, he had also mentioned that Anna Garcia was wearing a sweater when he had seen her the previous morning while experiencing a 92 degree heat wave. Mr.Greene had called Anna’s telephone with no answer, and had also rang the doorbell with no answer. The EMT and local police had arrived to the scene at 9:56 am, needing to break the door down. EMS discovered Anna Garcia laying face down, dead.

After 3 years of hoping Nancy would get better the Cruzan family decided that taking Nancy of the feeding and hydration tube is what Nancy would have wanted and what they thought was best. However the Cruzan's request was refused by the Missouri Department of Health. They believed they needed clear and convincing evidence that taking their daughter of the feeding and hydration tube is what Nancy would have really wanted. The Cruzans disagreed they thought that as her legal guardians they would speak for the decision she can not physically make. The Cruzans then took this to local court, but the case did not stop their. It made its way to the Supreme Court and became known as Cruzan v. Missouri Department of Health. Final outcome of the case was 5-4 in favor of the Missouri Department of Health. "The Court felt that the Cruzan case was best explored in the area of 'liberty' rather than 'privacy.' The Supreme Court upheld the authority of States to demand “clear and convincing” evidence of the injured person's wishes."(Cruzan by Cruzan v. Director, Missouri Department of Health. (n.d.). Oyez. Retrieved December 8, 2015, from

In Taylor’s case, a few things could have been done differently. One of the doctors who cared for Taylor really wanted her parents to choose to keep fighting but was very cold towards them and they would have been more ready to hear her side if she hadn’t treated them the way she did. Between pages 94 and 95 of First, Do No Harm, the parents try discussing at what point they should think about turning the respirator off to which she replied, “…Under Texas law there are requirements for removal of life support, and they don’t apply here.” If her parent’s chose to keep her on support, I presume Taylor would have passed all the same but it would have taken a lot longer and kept her parents in their estranged state until so.

Political activism is an important complement for nurses in the clinical practice. Nurses are in an exceptional position not only to provide quality bed side care to their patients but also to advocate for change within the community and political field. Common problem affecting a group of people can be a political issue. Identifying the cause of this issue and advocating to solve the root cause with the help of decision makers like politicians, hospital executives, managers or government bureaucrats, nurses can bring beneficial changes in Canadian Health care system.

The Superior Court of Los Angeles County became a pivotal case in a patient’s right to refuse treatment. In the initial case Ms. Bouvia and her legal team sought a court order to have the NGT removed and to stop all medical treatments she did not consent to. She argued that this treatment would not be a cure for her condition and would not improve her quality of life. The hospital staff argued the interest of the state prevailed over a patient’s right to refuse treatment. They noted that the state and healthcare teams viable interests include: “(1) preserving life, (2) preventing suicide, (3) protecting innocent third parties, and (4) maintaining the ethical standards of the medical profession, including supporting the right of physicians to effectively render necessary and appropriate medical services” (Liang & Lin, 2005). Additionally they sighted Ms. Bouvia’s failed previous attempt to “starve herself to death” in 1983 with the assistance of her medical team. The court denied her request citing these key interests and the fact that medical professionals felt that Ms. Bouvia could live 15-20 additional years with supplemental nutrition justified the state’s interest in preserving her life. The court also stated that any other decision would be condoning a medical team to aid and abet suicide.

The ethical principles for nurses to practice with beneficence and no maleficence. This legal battle between Terri Schiavo’s husband and her family was an ethical debate between continuing artificial life or remove her feeding tube by the request of her husband. Using the theories of utilitarianism and deontology can be applied or considered in making the most ethically correct resolution. The cases are very complex and raise many moral and ethical issues. The cases have brought awareness to society of “the importance of discussing end-of-life issues with family members and underscores how an advance directive, a living will and/or durable power of attorney for health care, are a healthcare proxy clarifies and provides evidence of the wishes of an individual regarding end-of-life decisions. Terri Schiavo should impress upon laypersons and professionals alike the uncertainty of the context in which issues of continuation and termination are argued ethically. Nobody knows what Mrs. Schiavo would have wanted. She left no advance directive and in its absence her husband says one thing and her parents

Terri Schiavo was 26 years old when she collapsed in her home and suffered acute hypoxia for several minutes. Slightly shy of a year after her injury, it was clinically determined that she was in a persistent vegetative state (Perry, Churchill, & Kirshner, 2005). There were no legal documents, such as an advance directive or living will, specifying the wishes for care under such circumstances. Her husband, Michael Schiavo, was designated as her legal guardian. The Schiavo case caught the public’s attention when her husband elected to remove her feeding tube in the mid 1900’s. He understood that there has never been a case of recovery after a year of being in a persistent vegetative state. One of the moral issues surrounding the case centered on the appropriateness of removing the life-sustaining feeding tube or maintaining it. Throughout the case, there has

They were the subjects of public disputes with family members, court systems, medical professionals, the media, and society at large. Terri Schiavo, Nancy Cruzan and Karen Ann Quinlan; their names are synonymous with permanent vegetative state (PVS). The amazing technological advancements in modern medicine has been credited with keeping persons alive who in times past would have died, therefore this is remarkable for countless families. In the cases of the Quinlan’s, the Cruzan’s and many like them, families members find it unbearable to witness loved ones who linger indefinitely in PVS with little or no chance for recovery. There are many like Terri Schiavo’s parents, who value the lives of their love ones no matter how limited their

This paper will present an argument of how the process of do not resuscitate (DNR) results in an ethical dilemma for workers in the healthcare field. In presenting the argument, this paper will also address the following three course learning objectives: 1) explain the legal rights of individuals as they interact with health care services, 2) analyze the monitoring systems that ensure human rights, legal aspects, and quality

The nurse today can be compared to a person who busies himself/herself with process of rescuing a situation to the extent that he/she finds no time to investigate the real cause of the problem. If a nurse could know the real cause of the problem, then he/she would be capable of eradicating it once and for all. This act of finding the real cause of the problem is what entails political activism and this is what should be running in the blood of every nurse.

We should not fight death; after all, it will come sooner or later. In 2014, a woman by the name of Marlise Munoz collapsed in her home due to a blood clot in her lungs. She was declared brain-dead, but rather than heed the family’s wishes to take Munoz off of life support, the hospital decided to keep her on it, due to her being pregnant. This sparked much dispute throughout the country. Many people believed the hospital was doing the right thing, but others decided it was not the hospital’s right to do this to the family. We in the twenty-first century need to decide that life sustainment is wrong, because it is not keeping someone alive, it is just extending their death. People on life support are not living, just like Valdemar in Poe’s story.