I noticed a Do Not Resuscitate wristband on my brother today as I visited him at the skilled nursing center. Hadn't noticed it before. I wonder if he knows what it means. I believe I do. If I understand it correctly, it means if he is dying, they won't try to save him. Why would anyone sign off on that, if life still had value for them? And, knowing it takes away life saving options, why would a hospital even suggest to him that he be DNR? Yes, I already knew they had him as DNR. They didn't assign him to hospice, but they did assign him to DNR. But, seeing that wristband brought it all home to me, and scared me.
I remember when my own heart was having trouble, and they prescribed nitride or some such, and told me, if I felt I was in trouble, to take it and go to the emergency. I'm thinking that with him being DNR, he cannot even get nitride (or whatever it is) and I wonder what would happen if we took him to the emergency. Would they take him through the doors, but and give him some care, but stop short of anything that would revitalize him -- because that would be against the law?
A couple weeks ago, I had a nurse explain to me that, day-to-day, they will continue to do whatever they can to make him better, and give him all the help and medicine that might help. But, if his heart fails and suddenly he is in the act of dying, they will not resuscitate him, nor give him any medicine that would resuscitate him or prevent his sudden death.
In other words, just let life take its course -- and, in this case, that means, just let death take its course.
We, as a society, should be careful who we are placing in that basket. There might be some for whom death is the better option, but let's be careful that we don't push someone in that we shouldn't.
Why would a hospital -- a place you go to be saved from death -- even make that an option? Maybe if the person is a vegetable, or living in pain, it makes sense, but if the person is living a life with value, why? Why do we say, "Sign on the dotted line, and we'll just let you die"?
My brother is not a vegetable. He is not living in pain. His life has value. He wants to live. Why did they pitch it to him, that if he was dying, they might have to break his ribs to resuscitate him, and he would die anyway? You really don't know if he will die until the moment is there and you answer the call with your best treatment.
And, why didn't they warn him that along with no CPR, they also would not offer any medicine that might revitalize him? I was in the room when the pitch was made to fmily members, and , no, that wasn't mentioned.
No, he doesn't want his ribs broken, but if you are dying, having a few ribs broken to save your life doesn't seem to be such a bad option. Why sell the danger of broken ribs as a reason to go to death?
I do think what is going on is a grave wrong. Life is precious. My brother and others should not be deprived of live-saving measures. I read in Utah law about the "Life with Dignity Order." I notice the language often used when Do Not Resuscitate and a sister program, hospice, are discussed. I consider how the language is all about how we want to provide comfort and honor and dignity.
Comfort and honor and dignity? Such a gentle spin on death.
These Life with Dignity Orders might be a good thing for some. They might be helpful, for those who don't want to live. But, there is a wicked side, as well. And, yes, I wonder what lobbyists were behind these laws when, ad just why it is that the medical industry wanted them in place.
I wonder why we would pass a law to just let someone die -- someone whose life still has value. And, why, when the doctor explains DNR to them, it should it be pitched as the better option. Why not just say, "If you are in the act of dying, do you want us to try to save you, or would you rather just die? We might have to break a few ribs, but it might mean we're able to save you."
You put it that way, and more people are going to choose life.
http://www.rules.utah.gov/publicat/code/r432/r432-031.htm
No comments:
Post a Comment