DNR Bracelets

[Michael_Mayo]

There isn’t a really good answer to this issue. But my point, in the panel discussion and here is not that a person should not have a Living Will at all, but that he should not pass it around to strangers. He should give it to a relative or relatives in whom he has implicit trust and share the same faith he does.

Wearing a DNR bracelet is putting your life in the hands of strangers, some of whom might just decide your life isn’t worth living when you, yourself, might think differently if you had the opportunity to opine.

And resuscitation can happen to people who do recover as well as to those who don’t.

A durable power of attorney is an altogether different thing, and (at least in my state) does NOT give another the power to decide whether life-saving treatments should be given or withheld. The law in my state is that only the individual can decide that and, if unable to state, might have done so previously in a Living Will.

Why would a person pass a Living Will around to strangers, unless you mean the medical records department. Wearing a DNR bracelet is telling strangers “Do Not Resuscitate”. If you think your life is worth living no matter what, then you obviously should not be wearing it.
I am surprised to heard your state does not recognize DPOA for Healthcare. So in your state what if we do not know if a person would want or not want resuscitation? And leaves no living will? I think that is why most states do recognize the DPOA. Someone has to decide. It has always seemed to me that the DPOA document is for the benefit of the surrogate decision maker appointed in the DPOA. That person then has it in writing what the patient would want.

 

[Ridgerunner]

Why would a person pass a Living Will around to strangers, unless you mean the medical records department. Wearing a DNR bracelet is telling strangers “Do Not Resuscitate”. If you think your life is worth living no matter what, then you obviously should not be wearing it.
I am surprised to heard your state does not recognize DPOA for Healthcare. So in your state what if we do not know if a person would want or not want resuscitation? And leaves no living will? I think that is why most states do recognize the DPOA. Someone has to decide. It has always seemed to me that the DPOA document is for the benefit of the surrogate decision maker appointed in the DPOA. That person then has it in writing what the patient would want.

In my state, the two things are different. Only the individual in question can authorize withdrawal of treatment that is otherwise medically indicated to preserve life. That’s what the Nancy Cruzan case in this state was all about. The Mo Supreme Court said that to withdraw means of supporting life, there must be “clear and convincing evidence” of the patient’s OWN wishes about the matter. In the absence of a writing, that can be difficult.

A power of attorney authorizes ANOTHER person to make decisions about other medical matters. When you think about it, if a person bothers to make a durable power of attorney, he can certainly make a living will or, for that matter, incorporate living will provisions into the DPOA. The only thing hazardous about incorporating it, though, is that once it’s in the hands of the medical provider, it’s their judgment, not the family member’s, from that point on. So in this state, they’re usually separate documents, and for that reason.

Medical records travel with you, or can. Give a living will to one provider, you have given it to all, some of whom might be a little more euthanasia minded than your family member. Best to keep them separate and give the living will only to one or two family members who actually understand your wishes and morals.

So the question arises; if you have a Living Will, (Missouri language for the document) then why have a medical DPOA? Because, for example, nursing homes won’t accept a patient without the DPOA. Also, providers are obliged to exercise the “standard of care” (the least risky) procedure in the absence of someone who might be authorized to give the okay to more risky, but perhaps more potentially beneficial treatment. You can’t even authorize a flu shot for anyone other than your child without a DPOA or being the court-appointed guardian of the person.

Those two things are not the same.

 

[Michael_Mayo]

In my state, the two things are different. Only the individual in question can authorize withdrawal of treatment that is otherwise medically indicated to preserve life. That’s what the Nancy Cruzan case in this state was all about. The Mo Supreme Court said that to withdraw means of supporting life, there must be “clear and convincing evidence” of the patient’s OWN wishes about the matter. In the absence of a writing, that can be difficult.

So in Missouri a person dying of cancer will be coded unless that patient provided clear evidence of their wishes not to be coded.

A power of attorney authorizes ANOTHER person to make decisions about other medical matters. When you think about it, if a person bothers to make a durable power of attorney, he can certainly make a living will or, for that matter, incorporate living will provisions into the DPOA. The only thing hazardous about incorporating it, though, is that once it’s in the hands of the medical provider, it’s their judgment, not the family member’s, from that point on. So in this state, they’re usually separate documents, and for that reason.

If appointed DPOA is a family member I don’t see how the medical provider makes the judgement.

Medical records travel with you, or can. Give a living will to one provider, you have given it to all, some of whom might be a little more euthanasia minded than your family member. Best to keep them separate and give the living will only to one or two family members who actually understand your wishes and morals.

If the Living Will expresses the patients wishes I do not see the problem with others having it. Certainly the DPOA ought to have it and probably the physician.