Patient Self-Determination Act

The recommendation I am suggesting would include a singed “Do Not Resuscitate-DNR” agreement from Margie Whitson. Her legal guardian notified of her request and Hospice be contacted. This would be in leu of a possible health issues that would arise in the future. And with this in place, her wishes can be granted. Margie Whitson has lived a long full filled life and all of her family is deceased. She has come to terms with all the setbacks in her life and now wishes to just stop her suffering.

A physician must understand that when it comes to deciding to withhold or withdraw life sustaining treatment it is ultimately the patient’s decision unless the patient is not competent enough to make this choice. I believe that a person can lose their life at any point. Death is certain and no one can run from it. In my opinion, a patient’s autonomy is of utmost importance anytime during healthcare however the physician can name some recommendations of what would be the best option for the patient. When it comes to patients they deserve to be treated with respect and ultimately be treated as an end not as a means to an end.

Though ethics committees have been helpful, scores of physician-patient disagreements end up in the U.S. court system with inconsistent results. The states adopted individual “statutes regulating DNR orders and their provisions vary in analysis throughout the U.S.” (Bishop, Brothers, Perry & Ahmad, 2010). One ethical dilemma that is constant in emergency rooms, the intensive care unit and terminally ill persons is a futility of treatment. In the case of CPR/DNR, New York State wanted to enact a law that describes the decisive responsibilities of the patient, and the family or surrogate, and physician. “In April 2003, the New-York Attorney General asserted that the DNR law would require a physician to obtain a consent of the patient’s health care surrogate before entering a DNR order, even when the physician

I selected this case study because I always hear of stories on family making the decision of whether to sign a DNR order is made

In this situation, the doctor asked the husband if he could resuscitate his wife despite her having a DNR. The nurse in the room could have interjected and said that the wife has already signed off on a DNR, and the question of resuscitation is off the table. Also, the nurse could have explained the patient's wishes to the husband and the doctor. In this case, the doctor was influenced by the husband's wants, the husband had told the doctor that he wants his wife to live.

A legal requirement of end of life care is that the wishes of the individual, including whether CPR should be attempted, as well as their wishes how they are cared for after death are properly documented. This means that their rights and wishes even after death are respected.

A legal requirement of end of life care is that the wishes of the individual, including whether CPR should be attempted, as well as their wishes how they are cared for after death are

The topic of end-of-life care may seem daunting and uncomfortable, and yet most individuals do have unique desires and concerns regarding their provision for the future. Providing the opportunity for that communication, the advance directive and POLST forms allow an individual to explicitly state their wishes before the future. Developed to lessen the apprehensions concerning patients undergoing any extensive and unwanted measures to preserve life at any cost, these medical directives lighten the decision-making burden for physicians and families alike and help comply with the patient’s utmost end-of-life wishes.

The importance of end of life issues and decisions are now being discussed at the time of admission to most acute care and long term acute care facilities. More attention is being placed on these specific decisions to ensure that the patient's

The physician also has the duty of inform the patient of alternative solutions such as palliative care, other pain management options, and hospices. Lastly, the physician must request that the patient notify another individual—a family or friend—of their decision. Despite the legalization of physician-assisted suicide, physicians are not obligated to participate. The patient, if eligible, must also fulfill all the necessary guidelines implemented if they wish to partake in the end of life process. The patient must first submit an oral request to their attending physician. A second oral request follows a 15 day waiting period. Following the second oral request is a written request. If the patient’s request is approved, the patient must wait another 48 hours before receiving their prescribed medications.

It is very important that each individual, if possible has a say in his or her own dying and death. Facing death is hard for everyone and there are specific issues to be talked about in advance. A living will or a Physician Order for Life-Sustaining Treatment (POLST) is extremely useful. The POLST is designed for people with serious or life-threatening illnesses. “This is a standardized form that describes a patient’s wishes and is signed by his or her physician, providing both summary of an individual’s advance directive decision and the physician’s order. It can be used to inform emergency personnel about a patient’s wishes for life sustaining procedures, such as CPR. “

In the medical field today, whenever a procedure is going to be done on a patient, informed consent must be given to the doctor from the patient prior the procedure taking place. Informed consent is the approval given by the patient to the doctor for treatment. In the case being discussed today, an 80 year old patient, with a history of congestive heart failure, is in the doctor's office complaining of chest pains. After an examination, the doctor believes the best course of treatment would be to have a surgical procedure, in an attempt to save the patients life. During the examination however, the patient expresses the wish to just be able to die. There is no Living will or Do Not Resuscitate (DNR) on file. The patient’s wife is

Ethical dilemma may also arise in cases where a patient may feel their right to DNR should be carried out when giving direct order. The DNR process, however, is required to be documented by a physician. Andrew Putnam (2003) presents a case where an eighty-eight year old patient’s code status was DNR; “However, the patient has never signed formal advance directive statement or assigned durable power of attorney for her health care to anyone.” (Putnam, 2003, 2025) Ethics can be simply stated as doing the right thing (Roberts, 2002, 242); but in this case ethics is questioned because the physician was faced with the decision to carry out the wishes of the patient or to make a decision based on legality. In this case, it may have been morally right to carry out the wishes of the patient who wanted DNR orders carried out, but it may have been the right choice to do the legal thing and not carried out due to lack of signed documentation.

I am sorry for your loss Tacarla. It is important to have advance directives or living will because it will guide family members on what the patient’s wishes are, even if they do not agree with it. I recently took care of a patient with an end-stage renal disease; he stated that enough is enough and he is stopping all treatments. The patient did not have an advance directive or DNR. The doctor explained to him and his family what it means if he stopped treatment and encouraged him to sign a DNR. Refusing treatment is the patient choice of forgoing all life-sustaining treatment; therefore a sign advance directive is needed to honor the patient’s wishes (DeSpelder & Stickland, 2015). The patient was ready, but the family was not. The family asked

As an administrator I would need to take into consideration the patient’s autonomy, autonomy is recognizing an individual’s right to make his/her own decisions about what is best for them regarding their health care (Pozgar, 2012). The patient’s rights always should be considered before any decisions are made by any other family members. In this scenario it is clear that the patient is unable to make any decisions, the patient has suffered a serious brain damage, and although it is not complete brain death, we must determine how to proceed.