Autism, C19 and Do Not Resuscitate
At the beginning of the Pandemic in the UK, a few news stories emerged about DNR files being issued to residents of care homes, en masse, without their participation in the process and without their knowledge or consent.
At the time discussions around doctors having to prioritise who to put on a ventilator were a new normal as countries responded to the horrors of the early days of the pandemic.
These DNR letters were sent to the elderly, patients with incurable/untreatable terminal illnesses and those with neurological conditions including ASD/autism and cerebral palsy.
https://www.bihr.org.uk/blog/the-fight-against-covid-19-whose-life-counts
I found this revolting, utterly hideous, in the cold light of day, when all the rhetoric and politicking is removed, there is a tier which is truly reserved for the young, the non-disabled and the healthy.
We all know this, but the bias had never been so blatantly obvious, and I never previously understood just how deeply the fissure ran. Not only was this categorisation seemingly normal within the medical sector, the concept of human rights or regard for the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities literally disappeared at the first relatively justifiable opportunity.
Laura McConnell, an Edinburgh teacher who has autism, ADHD and hearing difficulties went public with her concerns about a DNR being placed on her file without her consent after it emerged in June 21 that a deaf man living in Edinburgh had a DNR placed on his file without his consent, the reason given for making the decision without him was 'communication difficulties'.
https//www.edinburghlive.co.uk/news/edinburgh-news/edinburgh-mum-fears-do-not-22690551
The deaf community are trailblazers historically when it comes to disability rights, I'm watching this one with great interest.
https://www.deafaction.org/news/deaf-man-given-dnr-order-without-his-consent/
Comments
https://www.cqc.org.uk/publications/themed-work/dnacpr-people-at-the-centre
Source http://www.intellectualdisability.info/changing-values/articles/do-not-attempt-resuscitation,-end-of-life-decision-making-and-associated-directives,-and-their-implications-for-people-with-intellectual-disabilities
I can't wrap my head around the whole thing despite your best efforts to explain. The UK seems to have some of the strongest stances against euthanasia/assisted death, so how can they support something that's much worse?
Sorry, I don't mean to be aggressive towards you or anyone in this thread, my brain must be a bit off today because I still can't understand how this can be done without forging a signature since the judge clearly ruled that: "The core principle of prior consultation before a DNACPR decision is put into place on the case file applies in cases both of capacity and absence of capacity" - is this a guideline or a legal obligation?
The way the US handles it is this; A patient before becoming ill must by paperwork to there doctor specifically appoint a person to make vital decisions.This is almost always a husband or wife or in case of minor child a parent most often.If a parent is old and widowed it may be an adult child.
Only with the permission of the legally appointed person can life support to terminated.So a person in some circumstances may be on life support in a vegetable state for years or decades.Some people are alone and have no person to speak for them if they are unable to make there own decisions ,others have a appointed person who is religious and won't ever terminate life support.
A friend of mines sister was made brain dead in a car accident 35 years ago,but the mother was a Bostonian devout Irish Catholic and would not terminate life support.Then 15 years later the mother died and my friend ended his sister life support.
I myself have no medical emergency contact or decision maker right now being divorced since 2017 and both parents are gone.However I'm in a new relationship now and if were still together next october when I have my next physical I will appoint her in paperwork.
But here it is not uncommon for a 18 year old to get into a motorcycle accident and have a brain injury and live as a vegetable in a nursing home for 30 years.
EDIT:BTW the legal term for someone who makes a medical decision for a mentally incapacitated person is "next of kin" informal as it sounds
It's roughly the same here: doctors have a legal obligation to consult with the patient or the next of kin before making any kind of medical decision, including giving you medication. You cannot get any kind of intervention, even relatively non-invasive surgery (laparoscopy etc) without a signature. You have to READ and sign cca 187 forms to consent OR refuse any kind of medical procedure they recommend.
Makes sense,from what I have read the UK's unique in terminating support without consent
Euthanasia isn't legal here either and something like this would be a criminal offense both for the institution and the individual.
Again, apologies if I came across as aggressive - I'm just really shocked.
I'll add this much: "withdrawing hydration" leads to an excruciatingly painful death
The links you posted turned me from a supporter of euthanasia laws into a fervent supporter of euthanasia laws. Especially since it's been discussed here in recent years with the intent of making it legal.
I believe such things should be very strictly regulated and done in the most painless and humane way possible, with respect for one's dignity. "Withdrawing hydration" might appease some people's conscience, but it goes against all of the above.
Former majority leader of Vermont house of representatives Willem Jewett 58,who was diagnosed with mucosal melanoma a year ago.Died by medical suicide from a law he himself helped sponsor and pass through the Vermont state legislator.
I read it this morning in necn.com but if you google it its in several news sites.
A DNR means if the heart stops, CPR is not done. In my state, this order requires a signature of the patient or legal representative and the physician. It is a yellow form that must be posted in a conspicuous place.
Few people are aware of the extremely low rate of success of CPR. Fewer than 10% of patients getting CPR are revived, but most die later.
3% of people getting CPR survive more than a few weeks after receiving CPR. Most of those are young and otherwise healthy.
CPR is a violent procedure. Unless there is a DNR in place, legally CPR must be done.
Life support is when the physical body is supported by machines; usually a ventilator, but could also be tube feedings, etc.
In my state, in order to terminate life support, there must be a living will, or even better, a health care surrogate. In my state, a guardian cannot terminate life support. You have to have a health care surrogate; a person who you have named (in advance) in legal documents.
It is my opinion, that CPR in most cases is a violent procedure that is useless in most situations.
The value of life support is trickier to assess.
Rationing of care was discussed at hospitals and among doctors.