Case Analysis THE ETHICS WORKUP Georgetown University ...THE ETHICS WORKUP Georgetown University...

Developed by Carol Taylor, PhD, RN, Professor, Georgetown University School of Nursing and Health Studies, Kennedy Institute of Ethics Scholar

1

CaseAnalysis

THEETHICSWORKUP

GeorgetownUniversityCenterforClinicalBioethicsTheabilitytoworkuptheethicalaspectsofacaseisanessentialpartofclinicalreasoning.Theemphasisintheethicsworkupisonasensibleprogressionfromthefactsofthecasetoamorallysounddecision.Usingthefiveprincipalstepsoftheethicsworkup,guardiansandhealthprofessionalsholdingavarietyofphilosophicalandreligiouspositionsregardingethicscanshareabasicframeworkforthinkingaboutanddiscussingmorallytroublingcases:1.WHATARETHEFACTS?Itisvitallyimportanttoclarifythefactsofthecasein

ordertoanchorthedecision.Thesefactsarebothmedicalandsocial.Forexample,

bothanestimateofprognosisandanunderstandingofthepatient'shomesituationareoftenrelevanttoanethicaldecision.

• Personsinvolved(who?)• Diagnosis,prognosis,therapeuticoptions(what?)• Patientpreferences,beliefs,values(what?)• Chronologyofevents,timeconstraintsondecision(when?)• Medicalsetting(where?)• Reasonssupportingclaims,goalsofcurrentcare(why?)

Nursesandsocialworkersmaybeinstrumentalinensuringthatthepatient/familyandothernonmedicalhealthprofessionalsunderstandthemedicalfactsandthatthehealthcareteamunderstandspertinentnonmedicalinformationaboutthepatientandfamily.2.WHATISTHEISSUE?Isthereaconflictatthepersonal,interpersonal,institutionalorsocietallevel?Isthereaquestionthatariseseitheratthelevelofthoughtorfeeling?Doesthequestionhaveamoralorethicalcomponent?Why?(e.g.,doesitraiseissuesofrights,moralcharacter,etc.).Theissuemaynotbeethical,butratheradiagnosticproblemorasimplemiscommunication.3.FRAMETHEISSUE:Someguardiansandhealthprofessionalswillexploretheissueusingonlyonemoralapproach.Otherswilleclecticallyemployavarietyofapproaches.Butnomatterwhatone'sunderlyingmoralorientation,theethicalissueatstakeinagivencasecanbeframedintermsofseveralbroadareasofconcern,representingaspectsofthecasewhichmaybeinethicalconflict.Itisthereforeuseful,ifsomewhatartificial,todissectthecaseapartalongthelinesofthe

Developed by Carol Taylor, PhD, RN, Professor, Georgetown University School of Nursing and Health Studies, Kennedy Institute of Ethics Scholar

2

followingareasofconcern:

a.IdentifytheappropriateDecisionmaker(s).Therearethreerulesofthumbforhealthcaredecision-making.

• Patients with intact decision-making capacity make their owndecisions.Decisionmakingcapacityentailstheabilityto1)understandthe information necessary to make this particular decision (taskspecific),2)reasoninaccordwithrelativelyconsistentvalues,and3)communicateapreference.

• Surrogatesmakehealthcaredecisionsforincapacitatedpatientswitha prior history of capacity by using the substituted judgmentstandard.Totheextentthatthepatient’svaluesandpreferencesareknowntheyshoulddirectdecision-making.Thesurrogateasks,“whatwould the patient choose if able to make and communicate apreference?”not“WhatwouldIchooseifthechoiceweremine?

• Surrogatesofpatientswhoneverpossesseddecision-makingcapacity:infants,smallchildrenandprofoundlyretardedadults,makedecisionsusingthebestinterestsstandard.Thesurrogateasks,“Whichoptionismost likelytobenefitandtonotharmthepatient?”andconsidersrelief of suffering, preservation and restoration of function, and thequalityandextentofthelifesustained

b.Applythecriteriatobeusedinreachingclinicaldecisions.

1)Thespecificbiomedicalgoodofthepatient:Oneshouldask,whatwilladvancethebiomedicalgoodofthepatient?Whatarethemedicaloptionsandlikelyoutcomes?Determinetheeffectivenessofproposedinterventions[Atreatmentiseffectivetothedegreethatitreversesoramelioratesthenaturalprogressionofthedisease].Thisisanobjectivemedicaldeterminationtothedegreethatthisispossible]

2)Thebroadergoodsandinterestsofthepatient:Oneshouldask,whatbroaderaspectsofthepatient'sgood,i.e.,thepatient'sdignity,religiousfaith,othervaluedbeliefs,relationships,andtheparticulargoodofthepatient'schoice,arepertinenttothedecisionathand?Useabenefit-burdenanalysistodetermineifthebenefitsoftheproposedinterventionoutweightheburdens.Thisisasubjectivedetermination,whichcanonlybemadebythepatientorbythosewhoknowthepatientwell.3)Thegoodsandinterestsofotherparties:Healthprofessionalsmustalsobeattentivetothegoodsandinterestsofothers,e.g.,inthe

Developed by Carol Taylor, PhD, RN, Professor, Georgetown University School of Nursing and Health Studies, Kennedy Institute of Ethics Scholar

3

distributionofresources.Oneshouldask,whataretheconcernsofotherparties(family,healthcareprofessionals,healthcareinstitution,law,society,etc.)andwhatdifferencesdotheymake,morally,inthedecisionsthatneedtobemadeaboutthiscase?Indecidingaboutanindividualcase,however,theseconcernsshouldgenerallynotbegivenasmuchimportanceasthataffordedthegoodoftheindividualpatientwhomhealthprofessionalshavepledgedtoserve.Thephysicianexplainsthemedicaloptionstothepatient/surrogatesandifindicatedmakesarecommendation.Thepatient/surrogatemakesanuncoerced,informeddecision.Limitstopatient/surrogateautonomyincludetheboundsofrationalmedicine/nursing/socialwork,theprobabilityofdirectharmtoidentifiablethirdparties,andviolationoftheconsciencesofinvolvedhealthcareprofessionals.Inproblematiccasestheinterdisciplinaryteammaymeettoensureconsistencyintheirrecommendationstothepatient/surrogate(s).

c.Establishthehealthcareprofessionals’andguardian’smoral/professionalobligations.Theprimaryobjectofallclinicaldecisionmakingoughttobetosecurethehealth,well-beingorgooddyingofthepatientandtodothiswhilesimultaneouslyrespectingtheintegrityofthepatientandallthoseinvolvedindecisionmakingandimplementingtheplanofcare.

4.IDENTIFYANDWEIGHALTERNATIVECOURSESOFACTIONANDTHENDECIDE:Inclinicalethics,asinallotheraspectsofclinicalcare,adecisionmustbemade.Thereisnosimpleformula.Theanswerwillrequireclinicaljudgment,practicalwisdom,andmoralargument.Guardiansshouldworkcloselywithhealthcareprofessionalstoauthorizeadecisionthatsecuresthebestinterestsofthepatient:health,wellbeing,gooddying.Itisappropriatetoaskcliniciansforarecommendationbasedontheirclinicalexpertiseandexperience.Thisshouldthenbeweighedwiththeguardian’sknowledgeofthepatientandestimateofbestinterests.Sinceweliveinamorallypluralisticworld,goodpeoplecanreasondifferentlyaboutwhatoughttobedone.

Ethicallyrelevantconsiderations: 1)Balancingbenefitsandharmsinthecareofpatients

2)Disclosure,informedconsent,andshareddecisionmaking3)Thenormsoffamilylife4)Therelationshipsbetweencliniciansandpatients5)Theprofessionalintegrityofclinicians6)Cost-effectivenessandallocation7)Issuesofculturalandreligiousvariation

Developed by Carol Taylor, PhD, RN, Professor, Georgetown University School of Nursing and Health Studies, Kennedy Institute of Ethics Scholar

4

8)Considerationsofpower(Fletcher,Brody,Miller&Spencer)

Groundingandsourceofethics:philosophical(basedinreason),theological(basedinfaith),socio-cultural(basedincustom)

5.CRITIQUE:Itisimportanttobeabletocritiquethedecisionthathasbeenmadebyconsideringitsmajorobjectionsandtheneitherrespondingadequatelytothemorchangingone'sdecision.Somecasescanevenbetakentoanethicscommitteeforfurtherreflection.

Developed by Carol Taylor, PhD, RN, Professor, Georgetown University School of Nursing and Health Studies, Kennedy Institute of Ethics Scholar

5

Scenario #1 1.WhataretheFacts?MaryJohnsisa50-year-oldwomanwhohasaprofoundlevelofintellectualdisabilityandadaptiveskills.Shehastheco-occurringdisabilityofcerebralpalsyandrequiresacustom-moldedwheelchairformobility,and24-hoursupportsforeating,dressing,hygieneandtoparticipateinherfavoritecommunityactivities.Marywasinstitutionalizedatanearlyage,andshehasnofamilyconnections.Youarehercourtappointedguardian,andyouhaveworkedwithherforthepastfouryears.Youregularlyparticipateinallinterdisciplinaryteammeetings,anddespitetheever-changingstaffinherresidence,youcontinuetobediligentincommunicatingwiththestaffsoastokeepinformedofMary’sneeds.YoualsousestafftoassistincommunicatingwithMary,sinceMarydoesnotseemtorecognizeyouwhenyoumeet.Youreceiveacallfromthehospital.ItisthemedicalresidentinformingyouthatMaryhashadasignificantcerebralvascularaccident/stroke(bleedinginthebrain).Whileitisabitprematuretosaywithcertainty,theextentofthebleedthatisshownontheMRIwouldindicatethatshewouldnotlikelyrecoverherpriorabilities(theresidentdoesnotseemtobefamiliarwithherpreviousleveloffunctioning,however).BecausetherewasnoindicationofanyadvancedirectiveswhenMarypresentedattheemergencydepartment,shewasplacedonaventilatortomaintainherbreathing.Themedicalresidentisaskingyouifyouwishtoexecutea“donotresuscitate”order.

Itisnowaweeklater.Marycontinuestorequireventilatorsupport,butshehasnotexperiencedanyothercrises.TodayyouareaskedtoconsentforagastricfeedingtubetoallowMarytoreceiveadequatenutrition.YouhavevisitedMary3timesinthehospital,butshedoesn’tevenopenhereyeswhenyoucallhernameandrubherarm.ThestafffromthegrouphometellsyouthattheybelieveMarywillrecover;shejustneedstime.ThemedicalteamatthehospitalreportsthatthedamagefromtheCVAissignificant,andsheisnotlikelytoreturntoherformerself.2.Whatistheethicalissue?Shouldyouconsenttoa“donotresuscitate”orderintheeventherheartstopsorshestopsbreathing? Shouldyouconsenttoagastrictubetoprovideherwithnutrition?

Developed by Carol Taylor, PhD, RN, Professor, Georgetown University School of Nursing and Health Studies, Kennedy Institute of Ethics Scholar

6

3.FrametheIssue

a.Identifytheappropriatedecision-makerThefactsaspresenteddonotcommunicatesufficientinformationforadecisiontobemadeaboutMaryJohns’abilitytomeetthethreecriteriatodemonstratedecision-makingcapacity:theabilityto1)understandherconditionandtreatmentoptions,2)deliberateinaccordancewithherownvaluesandgoalsandtomakeanuncoerceddecisionamongtreatmentoptions;and3)communicate(verballyornonverbally)thisdecision(HastingsCenterGuidelinesforDecisionsonLifeSustainingTreatmentandCareNeartheEndofLife).Her“profoundlevelofintellectualdisability”attheveryleastsuggeststhatherabilitytodotheaboveisseriouslycompromised.TotheextentthatMary’scaregiverscanspeaktowhattheybelieveherpreferencesare,theseshouldbefactoredcarefullyintothedecisionsathand.Theguardian,however,istheprimarydecision-makerandneedstocreateapartnershipandworkcloselywiththeprofessionalteamtomakeandauthorizetreatmentdecisions.b.Applythecriteriatobeusedinreachingclinicaldecisions

1)Thespecificbiomedicalgoodofthepatient2)Thebroadergoodsandinterestsofthepatient3)Thegoodsandinterestsofotherparties

ShouldyouauthorizeattemptstoresuscitateMaryifherheartstopsorshestopsbreathing?TheHastingsCenterGuidelinesforDecisionsonLife-SustainingTreatmentandCareNeartheEndofLife1read:

Insomecircumstances,cardiopulmonaryresuscitation(CPR)atermcoveringarangeofinterventionsaimedatrestoringheartbeatandbreathingaftercardiacarrest,isaneffectivetreatmentthatcansavelives.…However,whenapatientwhoseoverallconditionisdeterioratingsufferscardiacarrest,thelikelihoodthatCPRwillmeetitsimmediategoalofrestoringheartbeatandbreathingislower,andthepatient’sprognosisislikelytobepoornomatterwhatinterventionsaresubsequentlyattempted.ThereisahugeliteratureontheoutcomesofCPRinitiatedinvarioussettingsanddifferentpatientpopulations.PortrayalsofCPRinpopularmediacanpromptmembersofthepublic—includingpatients,surrogates,andlovedones—toformamisleadingimpressionofthenatureofthistreatmentandthe

1Berlinger,N.,Jennings,B.andWolf,S.M.(2013).TheHastingsCenterGuidelinesforDecisionsonLife-SustainingTreatmentandCareNeartheEndofLife.NewYork:OxfordUniversityPress,pp.165-166.

Developed by Carol Taylor, PhD, RN, Professor, Georgetown University School of Nursing and Health Studies, Kennedy Institute of Ethics Scholar

7

circumstancesunderwhichitislikelyorunlikelytoachieveitslife-savinggoal.In-hospitalCPRinvolvingadvancedcardiaclifesupport(ACLS)canbeahighlyinvasiveprocedurethatapatientmayexperienceasburdensome.

MaryfallsintothecategoryofpatientswhoseconditionisdeterioratingandtheguardianislikelytogetrecommendationfromclinicianstoauthorizeaDoNotAttempttoResuscitate(DNAR)orDoNotResuscitate(DNR)order.Itwouldbeethicaltoauthorizesuchanorderunlesstheguardianhasreservationsabouttheaccuracyofthereportofdamageresultingfromthecerebralbleed.InthissituationaskingformoretimetoevaluatethepossibilityofMary’sreturntoherformerleveloffunctioningisappropriate.ManyhospitalsarenowreplacingDNAR/DNRterminologywithAllowNaturalDeath(AND)Orders,whichsimplymeanthatintheeventthatone’sheartstopsoronestopsbreathing,naturaldeathisallowedandnointerventionstorestartheartbeatorbreathingareattempted.AnANDOrderwouldsimilarlybeethicallyappropriate.ThedecisionaboutwhetherornottoinsertagastricfeedingtubewillturnonthedegreeofdamageresultingfromthestrokeandMary’sabilitytoreturntoherformerself.IsthestafffromthegrouphomebeingunrealisticwhentheypersistinbelievingthatMarywillgetbetter?Aretheysimplyhavingdifficultyacceptingthemedicalteam’sevaluationandprognosis?Alternatively,hasthemedicalteamallowedsufficienttimetoaccuratelydescribethedegreeofdamagesecondarytothestrokeandtheprobabilitythatMarywillreturntoherformerself?TheguardianshouldpressMary’sphysicianforananswertothelatterquestionandifnotsatisfiedwithwhatislearned,seekasecondopinion.ItwouldbeimportanttolearnifitisprobablethatMarywillreturntoherformerabilities,orifMarycanatleastgainsomecapabilitiesthatwillallowhertoenjoysomeofthesamethingsthatpreviouslygaveheragoodqualityoflife.IftheguardianisconfidentthatMary’sdamageissevereandthatshewillneverreturntoherformerselfitwouldbeappropriatetonotinsertthegastrictubeandtotransitiontopurelypalliativegoals.Atthispoint,theethicalquestionbecomes:Shouldthetreatmentchangefromstabilizingfunctioningtopreparingforacomfortableanddignifieddeath?Ifthelater,adecisionmightbemadetoremoveMary’sventilatorysupport.Unlesstherearereligious,culturalorotherreasonstobelievethatMarywouldvaluelifelivedunderanycircumstancesitwouldbeappropriatetotransitiontopurelypalliativegoalsatthispoint.SignificantfortheguardianisthefactthatduringthethreevisitswithMary,shedoesn’tevenopenher

Developed by Carol Taylor, PhD, RN, Professor, Georgetown University School of Nursing and Health Studies, Kennedy Institute of Ethics Scholar

8

eyeswhenyoucallhernameandrubherarm.Thisisasignificantdeparturefrombaseline.TherearenoimmediatethirdpartiestobeconsideredwhenthisdecisionismadeexcepttobesensitivetotheinterestsoftheMary’scaregivers.c.Establishthehealthcareprofessionals’andguardian’smoral/professionalobligations.Theprimaryobjectofallclinicaldecisionmakingoughttobetosecurethehealth,well-beingorgooddyingofthepatientandtodothiswhilesimultaneouslyrespectingtheintegrityofthepatientandallthoseinvolvedindecisionmakingandimplementingtheplanofcare.Ifadecisionismadetotransitiontopurelypalliativegoalsandtoforegothefeedingtubeandortoremoveventilatorysupport,everyeffortshouldbemadetopreparethepatientforacomfortable,dignifieddeath.Allattentionshouldbedirectedtothepatient’s(andcaregivers’)comfortandpeace.Areferralshouldthenbemadetohospice.

4.IdentifyandWeighAlternativeCoursesofActionandThenDecide

Ethicallyrelevantconsiderations1)Balancingbenefitsandharmsinthecareofpatients2)Disclosure,informedconsent,andshareddecisionmaking3)Thenormsoffamilylife4)Therelationshipsbetweencliniciansandpatients5)Theprofessionalintegrityofclinicians6)Cost-effectivenessandallocation7)Issuesofculturalandreligiousvariation8)Considerationsofpower2

Basicallytherearetwooptionstoconsider:1)maintainthegoalofstabilizingMary’sfunctioningwhichentailstreatingcomplicationsastheyarise,maintainingventilatorysupport,insertingafeedingtube,resuscitationinterventionsifherheartorbreathingstops,or2)transitiontopurelypalliativegoalswiththeexplicitgoalbeingtoprepareMary,andhercaregiversforapeacefulanddignifieddeath.InMary’scasemuchwilldependontheextentofdamagerelatedtobleedingintoherbrainandhowthiswillaffecthereverydayfunctioningandabilitytoexperienceameaningfullife.Towhatdegreewillshebeabletoreturntoherpre-2Fletcher,J.C.&Spencer,E.M.(2005).Clinicalethics:History,content,andresources.InJ.C.Fletcher,E.M.Spencer,&P.A.Lombardo,Eds.,Fletcher’sintroductiontoclinicalethics,3rded.Hagerstown,MD:UniversityPublishingGroup,p.12.

Developed by Carol Taylor, PhD, RN, Professor, Georgetown University School of Nursing and Health Studies, Kennedy Institute of Ethics Scholar

9

hospitalizationbaseline?Andtotheextentthatthisisimpossible,wouldherresultingconditionbeacceptabletoher—needtocontinueventilatorysupport,befedwithagastrictube,etc.?Aretheburdensassociatedwiththeseinterventionsproportionatetothebenefitsshederives?Unlesshercaregiverscanmakeacasethatitisreasonabletoexpectareturntopreviousfunctioning,thentransitioningtopurelypalliativegoalsisethicallyappropriate.GiventheobviousattachmentMary’scaregivershavetoher,carefulattentionshouldbepaidtosupportingthemandhelpingthemtounderstandthedecisionbeingmade.Iftheguardian,Ms.Johnson’scaregivers,andhealthcareprofessionalscannotagreeonacourseofaction,referraltoanethicscommitteeorconsultantshouldbemade.5.CritiqueWhateveralternativeisselected,onceitisimplementedtheguardianshouldcarefullyfollowtheoutcomestoseewhatcanbelearnedthatwouldbehelpfulinasimilarsituationinthefuture.

Developed by Carol Taylor, PhD, RN, Professor, Georgetown University School of Nursing and Health Studies, Kennedy Institute of Ethics Scholar

10

Scenario #2 1.WhataretheFacts?RobertPerkinsisa45-year-oldmanwithDownsyndrome.Youhavebeenhisguardiansincehewas18yearsoldandexitedthechildwelfaresystem.Despitehisprofoundlevelofintellectualdisability,youhavecometoappreciatehissenseofhumorovertheyears,andyouknowabouthisfavoritefood(pizza),pasttimes(walkingtotheicecreamstoreupthestreetfromhishome)andfavoriteclothestowear(anythingmadeofsweatshirtfabric).Aftertwoyearshavepassed,staffreportsnewbehavioralproblemsthatincludeagitationafterreturningfromhisafternoonjob,refusalstotakeashower,andwantingtoeatdinnerrightafterhealreadyhaddinner.Robertiseventuallydiagnosedwithdementia.Althoughplacedonadrugthatwassupposedtoslowtherateofdementia-relatedproblems,Roberthasdevelopedaseizuredisorder,hashadtoquithisjob,andrecentlyhasbeenhavingchokingepisodeswheneating.Robert’sswallowingstudyshowsthatthereisnophysicalobstructioninhisesophagus,butthespeechtherapistandtheoccupationaltherapistrelatehiseatingproblemstothefactthatheisforgettinghowtoeatandcannolongerswalloweasily.Youparticipateinaninterdisciplinaryteammeeting.ThecaregivingstaffwhoknowRobertwellareinfavorofusingagastrictubefornutrition.Theprimarycarephysicianisnotinfavorofthegastrictubebecauseofthepresenceofdementia,therapiditywithwhichheisdeclining,andthefutilityofanutritionalinterventiontohiseventualoutcome.2.Whatistheethicalissue?ShouldtheguardianconsenttoagastrictubetoprovideMr.Perkinswithnutrition?Howcantheconflictbetweenthecaregivingstaffandprimarycarephysicianbemediated? 3.FrametheIssue

a.Identifytheappropriatedecision-makerAtanearlierageMr.Perkinswascapableofmakingandexecutingsomesimpledecisions(foodpreferences,clothing)butatthepresenttimedementiaisrobbinghimoftheabilitytomeetthethreecriteriatodemonstratedecision-makingcapacity:theabilityto1)understandhisconditionandtreatmentoptions,2)deliberateinaccordancewithhisownvaluesandgoalsandtomakeanuncoerceddecisionamongtreatmentoptions;and3)communicate(verballyornonverbally)thisdecision

Developed by Carol Taylor, PhD, RN, Professor, Georgetown University School of Nursing and Health Studies, Kennedy Institute of Ethics Scholar

11

(HastingsCenterGuidelinesforDecisionsonLifeSustainingTreatmentandCareNeartheEndofLife).Theguardianistheprimarydecision-makerandneedstocreateapartnershipandworkcloselywiththeprofessionalteamtomakeandauthorizetreatmentdecisions.b.Applythecriteriatobeusedinreachingclinicaldecisions

1)Thespecificbiomedicalgoodofthepatient2)Thebroadergoodsandinterestsofthepatient3)Thegoodsandinterestsofotherparties

Whileagastrictubemay“solvetheproblem”ofimpairednutritionandreducethelikelihoodofchoking,thereisgeneralmedicalconsensusthatinend-stagedementiathegoalsofcareshouldbetransitionedtopurelypalliativegoals.Thepreponderanceofevidencedoesnotsupporttheuseoffeedingtubesforadultswithadvanceddementia.3Anasogastrictubewillnotcureoramelioratehisdementiaandrapiddecline.ItwouldbeappropriateandnecessaryfortheguardiantoasktheprimarycarephysicianifalltreatablecausesofMr.Perkin’srapiddeclinehavebeenruledoutgiventhefactofMr.Perkin’syoungage(45)andextremelyrapiddecline.Theburdenofproofwouldbeonthecaregivingstafftoprovidearationaleforwhythenasogastrictubeshouldbeinserted.Aretherereligiousorculturalbeliefsorvaluesthatwoulddictateinsertionofthenasogastrictube?Whatiftheburdensassociatedwithafeedingtubeoutweightheanticipatedbenefits?Theredonotseemtobethirdpartyinterestsatstakeinthisdecision.c.Establishthehealthcareprofessionals’andguardian’smoral/professionalobligations.Theprimaryobjectofallclinicaldecisionmakingoughttobetosecurethehealth,well-beingorgooddyingofthepatientandtodothiswhilesimultaneouslyrespectingtheintegrityofthepatientandallthoseinvolvedindecisionmakingandimplementingtheplanofcare.Ifadecisionismadetotransitiontopurelypalliativegoalsandtoforegothefeedingtubeeveryeffortshouldbemadetopreparethepatientforacomfortable,dignifieddeath.Allattentionshouldbedirectedtothepatient(andfamily’s)comfortandpeace.Areferralshouldthenbemadetohospice.

3SampsonEL,CandyB,JonesL.Enteraltubefeedingforolderpeoplewithadvanceddementia.CochraneDatabaseofSystematicReviews2009,Issue2.Art.No.:CD007209.DOI:10.1002/14651858.CD007209.pub2

Developed by Carol Taylor, PhD, RN, Professor, Georgetown University School of Nursing and Health Studies, Kennedy Institute of Ethics Scholar

12

4.IdentifyandWeighAlternativeCoursesofActionandThenDecideEthicallyrelevantconsiderations

1)Balancingbenefitsandharmsinthecareofpatients2)Disclosure,informedconsent,andshareddecisionmaking3)Thenormsoffamilylife4)Therelationshipsbetweencliniciansandpatients5)Theprofessionalintegrityofclinicians6)Cost-effectivenessandallocation7)Issuesofculturalandreligiousvariation8)Considerationsofpower4

Basicallytherearetwooptionstoconsider:1)insertionofafeedingtubewiththeprimarytreatmentgoalbeingtostabilizehisfunctioning—evenwiththerapiddeclineanddementiaprogressionor2)transitioningtopurelypalliativegoalswiththeexplicitgoalbeingtopreparehim,hisfamily,caregiversandhousemates(assumingheisinagrouphome)forapeacefulanddignifieddeath.InMr.Perkin’scase,evidence-basedpracticeandthedisproportionateburden-benefitratioassociatedwithfeedingtubesforsomeoneinhisconditionrecommendtransitioningtopalliativegoals.Somebelievethateverypatientshouldbefed—evenwhenthisentailsmedicalnutritionandhydration--andthatfailuretodosoconstitutesgrossneglect.Researchhas,however,nowcounteredthisview.GiventheobviousattachmentMr.Perkin’scaregivershavetohim,carefulattentionshouldbepaidtosupportingthemandhelpingthemtounderstandthedecisionbeingmade.Iftheguardian,Mr.Perkin’scaregivers,andhealthcareprofessionalscannotagreeonacourseofaction,referraltoanethicscommitteeorconsultantshouldbemade.5.CritiqueWhateveralternativeisselected,onceitisimplementedtheguardianshouldcarefullyfollowtheoutcomestoseewhatcanbelearnedthatwouldbehelpfulinasimilarsituationinthefuture.

4Fletcher,J.C.&Spencer,E.M.(2005).Clinicalethics:History,content,andresources.InJ.C.Fletcher,E.M.Spencer,&P.A.Lombardo,Eds.,Fletcher’sintroductiontoclinicalethics,3rded.Hagerstown,MD:UniversityPublishingGroup,p.12.

Developed by Carol Taylor, PhD, RN, Professor, Georgetown University School of Nursing and Health Studies, Kennedy Institute of Ethics Scholar

13

Scenario #3 1.WhataretheFacts?LouiseParkerisa65yearoldwomanwithprofoundintellectualdisability.Heroldersisterhasalwaysservedashersurrogatedecision-maker,butshewasrecentlydiagnosedwithadvanceddementia,andyouhavebeenappointedbythecourttoserveasMs.Parker’sguardian.YoureviewthemedicalrecordanddiscoverthatMs.Parkerhasalwaysbeenveryactiveandenjoyedrelativelygoodhealthwiththeexceptionofhighbloodpressurethathasbeendifficulttocontrolovertheyears.Herprimarycarephysicianrecentlyreferredhertoarenalspecialistbecauseherglomerularfiltrationrateis17,whichindicatesthatMs.Parkerwillneedtoconsiderbeginningkidneydialysis.Ms.Parker’sstafftellsyouthattheyhavenoideahowthatwillbeaccomplishedbecausesherequiressedationforroutinedentalexamsandforblooddrawsforroutinetests.Youcheckwithanotherguardianwhotellsyounottoworrybecausesherepresentsseveralpeoplewhoaregivenheavysedativesthreetimesaweekwhentheyreceivedialysis.2.Whatistheethicalissue?Shouldyouconsenttorenaldialysis? 3.FrametheIssue

a.Identifytheappropriatedecision-makerMs.Parkerhasneverbeencapableofmeetingthethreecriteriatodemonstratedecision-makingcapacity:theabilityto1)understandherconditionandtreatmentoptions,2)deliberateinaccordancewithherownvaluesandgoalsandtomakeanuncoerceddecisionamongtreatmentoptions;and3)communicate(verballyornonverbally)thisdecision(HastingsCenterGuidelinesforDecisionsonLifeSustainingTreatmentandCareNeartheEndofLife).Sincetheoldersisterwhoservedashersurrogatedecisionmakernowhasadvanceddementia,thecourtappointedguardianistheprimarydecision-makerandneedstocreateapartnershipandworkcloselywiththeprofessionalteamtomakeandauthorizetreatmentdecisions.b.Applythecriteriatobeusedinreachingclinicaldecisions

1)Thespecificbiomedicalgoodofthepatient2)Thebroadergoodsandinterestsofthepatient3)Thegoodsandinterestsofotherparties

Hemodialysisisatherapythatcompensatesforaperiodoftimeforthefailureofanorgansystemnecessaryforlife.Clearlyrenaldialysisis

Developed by Carol Taylor, PhD, RN, Professor, Georgetown University School of Nursing and Health Studies, Kennedy Institute of Ethics Scholar

14

indicatedforMs.Parkerifwearejustlookingtoaddressherfailingrenal(kidney)function.Manyandprobablymost65yearoldswithacomparableglomerularfiltrationrateof17butwithoutthecomplicatingvariablesofMs.Parker’sprofoundintellectualdisabilitywouldopttobegindialysis.Theseindividualswithdecision-makingcapacitywouldmakedecisionsaboutinitiatingandcontinuingdialysisafterthoughtfullyreflectingontheanticipatedbenefitsoftreatmentversustheburdensoftreatment.Decision-makingaboutdialysisrequiresclearcommunicationaboutdiagnosis,prognosis,thepatient’spreferencesandtreatmentoptions,includingtheoptiontoforgolife-sustainingtreatment.5ThecriticalquestioninMs.Parker’ssituationiswhetherornotandhowtheneedtosedateherforeachdialysistreatmentshouldinfluencethetreatmentdecision.Thegrowingtrendistodiscourageinitiatingtreatmentsthatroutinelyinvolvesedation—asopposedtodentalwork,whichmightrequireoneepisodeofsedationannually.InMs.Parker’scaseifdialysiswithsedationreturnshertoherusualactivestateofgoodhealthandthethreetimesweeklyexperiencesofsedationdobegintocompromisehergeneralhealth,itcouldbewarranted.Theonlywaytoknowthiswouldbetoauthorizeatrialbytherapyandtocarefullymonitorwhathappens.Ideally,ifMs.Parkerbecomesacclimatedtothedialysisexperience,shemayeventuallyneedlessandlesssedationwhileexperiencingallthebenefitsofdialysis.Intheeventthisdoesnothappenandtheburdensofsedationanddialysisbecomedisproportionatetothebenefitofimprovedrenalfunction,dialysisshouldbediscontinued.Itisalwaysethicallypermissivetowithdrawatreatmentoncestarted,whichprovestobeineffectiveordisproportionatelyburdensome.Asalways,centraltomakingtreatmentdecisionsisreflectionaboutwhatnotonly“fixes”adiscretemedicalproblem,inthiscaseimpairedrenalfunction,butalsowhatpromotesthewell-beingofthewholeperson.ThirdpartyinterestsatstakeinthisdecisioninvolvethecaregiverswhowillberesponsiblefortransportationandassistanceonthedaystheMs.Parkerisreceivingtreatment.c.Establishthehealthcareprofessionals’andguardian’smoral/professionalobligations.

5Berlinger,N.,Jennings,B.andWolf,S.M.(2013).TheHastingsCenterGuidelinesforDecisionsonLife-SustainingTreatmentandCareNeartheEndofLife.NewYork:OxfordUniversityPress,pp.169.

Developed by Carol Taylor, PhD, RN, Professor, Georgetown University School of Nursing and Health Studies, Kennedy Institute of Ethics Scholar

15

Theprimaryobjectofallclinicaldecisionmakingoughttobetosecurethehealth,well-beingorgooddyingofthepatientandtodothiswhilesimultaneouslyrespectingtheintegrityofthepatientandallthoseinvolvedindecisionmakingandimplementingtheplanofcare.Ms.Parker’sguardianandhealthcareprofessionalsneedtoreflectcarefullyonwhatitisreasonabletoexpectifdialysiswithsedationisinitiated.Ifadecisionismadeatpresentoreventuallytotransitiontopurelypalliativegoalsandtoforegothedialysis,everyeffortshouldbemadetopreparethepatientforacomfortable,dignifieddeath.Allattentionshouldbedirectedtothepatient(andfamily’sandcaregiver’s)comfortandpeace.Areferralshouldthenbemadetohospice.

4.IdentifyandWeighAlternativeCoursesofActionandThenDecide

Ethicallyrelevantconsiderations1)Balancingbenefitsandharmsinthecareofpatients2)Disclosure,informedconsent,andshareddecisionmaking3)Thenormsoffamilylife4)Therelationshipsbetweencliniciansandpatients5)Theprofessionalintegrityofclinicians6)Cost-effectivenessandallocation7)Issuesofculturalandreligiousvariation8)Considerationsofpower6

Basicallytherearethreeoptionstoconsider.1)Committorenaldialysiswithsedationandacceptastheoverallgoaltostabilizeherfunctioning,treatingeachnewconditionorcomplicationasitarises.2)Attemptatrialbytherapytodetermineifherneedforsedationcanbemetwithoutdisproportionatelycompromisingherwell-being.Thegoalinthisinstancewouldbetoeventuallydecreaseherneedforsedationasshebecomesacclimatedtotheexperienceofdialysis.Herealsotheoverallgoalistostabilizeherfunctioning.Iftheburdensassociatedwithsedationanddialysisbecomedisproportionatetothebenefitsofimprovedrenalfunction,dialysiscanbestoppedandMs.Parkertransitionedtopurelypalliativegoals.3)MakeadecisionthatevidencesupportsnotattemptingatrialbytherapyandtransitionimmediatelytothegoalofallowingthecompromisedrenalfunctiontocontinueandpreparingMs.Parkerforacomfortableanddignifieddeath.Inthisinstanceareferraltohospiceisimperative.

6Fletcher,J.C.&Spencer,E.M.(2005).Clinicalethics:History,content,andresources.InJ.C.Fletcher,E.M.Spencer,&P.A.Lombardo,Eds.,Fletcher’sintroductiontoclinicalethics,3rded.Hagerstown,MD:UniversityPublishingGroup,p.12.

Developed by Carol Taylor, PhD, RN, Professor, Georgetown University School of Nursing and Health Studies, Kennedy Institute of Ethics Scholar

16

Inthisinstancewewouldrecommendthetrialbytherapyunlesstheexperienceofinvolvedhealthcareprofessionalsinnumeroussimilarsituationsconvincesthemthatthecumulativeburdensoftheongoingneedforsedationanddialysisareboundtooutweighthebenefitsofimprovedrenalhealth.ThosewhoknowMs.Parkerbestarebestsituatedtoassessthelikelihoodthatherneedforsedationwilldecreaseasshebecomesacclimatizedtotheexperienceofdialysis.Iftheguardian,Ms.Parker’scaregivers,andhealthcareprofessionalscannotagreeonacourseofaction,referraltoanethicscommitteeorconsultantshouldbemade.5.CritiqueWhateveralternativeisselected,onceitisimplementedtheguardianshouldcarefullyfollowtheoutcomestoseewhatcanbelearnedthatwouldbehelpfulinasimilarsituationinthefuture.

Developed by Carol Taylor, PhD, RN, Professor, Georgetown University School of Nursing and Health Studies, Kennedy Institute of Ethics Scholar

17

Scenario #4 1.WhataretheFacts?JohnRosarioisan85-year-oldmanwithprofoundintellectualdisability.Youhavebeenhisguardianforthepast5years,sincehisonlybrother,whohadbeenhishealthcaredecision-maker,diedsuddenly.YouknowthatwhenJohnwasachild,hewasplacedinthestateinstitution,wherehelearnedtoenjoycigarettesmoking.Hecontinuedsmokingahalfapackadayuntilhewas60yearsold.JohnwasrecentlydiagnosedwithStage4lungcancer.Youelectedtonotseekchemotherapyorradiationtreatmentbasedonyourinterpretationofthemedicalrecommendationsgiventoyou.WhenyouvisitJohn,heactuallydoesnotappearmuchdifferenttoyoufrombeforethecancerdiagnosis.HelikestowatchTV,stillenjoyseatinghisfavoritefoods,buthasrecentlystoppedgoingtochurchbecausehegetstootired.YouarenotifiedthatJohnhasbeenadmittedtothehospitalwithpneumonia.Thedoctorintheemergencydepartmentcallsyoutoreceiveconsenttotreatthepneumonia.Youaresurprisedthatyouarebeinggiventhealternativenottotreatthepneumonia.2.Whatistheethicalissue?Shouldyouconsenttotheantibiotictreatment? 3.FrametheIssue

a.Identifytheappropriatedecision-makerMr.Rosariohasneverbeencapableofmeetingthethreecriteriatodemonstratedecision-makingcapacity:theabilityto1)understandherconditionandtreatmentoptions,2)deliberateinaccordancewithherownvaluesandgoalsandtomakeanuncoerceddecisionamongtreatmentoptions;and3)communicate(verballyornonverbally)thisdecision(HastingsCenterGuidelinesforDecisionsonLifeSustainingTreatmentandCareNeartheEndofLife).Sincethedeathofhisbrotherwhoservedashissurrogatedecisionmaker,thecourtappointedguardianistheprimarydecision-makerandneedstocreateapartnershipandworkcloselywiththeprofessionalteamtomakeandauthorizetreatmentdecisions.b.Applythecriteriatobeusedinreachingclinicaldecisions

1)Thespecificbiomedicalgoodofthepatient2)Thebroadergoodsandinterestsofthepatient3)Thegoodsandinterestsofotherparties

Developed by Carol Taylor, PhD, RN, Professor, Georgetown University School of Nursing and Health Studies, Kennedy Institute of Ethics Scholar

18

Treatmentforpneumoniainvolvescuringtheinfectionandpreventinganycomplications.7Specifictreatmentsdependonthetypeandseverityofthepneumonia,andthepatient’sageandoverallhealth.Theoptionsinclude:

• Antibiotics,totreatbacterialpneumonia.Itmaytaketimetoidentifythetypeofbacteriacausingthepneumoniaandtochoosethebestantibiotictotreatit.Symptomsoftenimprovewithinthreedays,althoughimprovementusuallytakestwiceaslonginsmokers.Ifthepatient’ssymptomsdon'timprove,thedoctormayrecommendadifferentantibiotic.

• Antiviralmedications,totreatviralpneumonia.Symptomsgenerallyimproveinonetothreeweeks.

• Feverreducers,suchasaspirinoribuprofen.

• Coughmedicine,tocalmthepatient’scoughsohe/shecanrest.Becausecoughinghelpsloosenandmovefluidfromyourlungs,it'sagoodideanottoeliminatethecoughcompletely.

HospitalizationThepatientmayneedtobehospitalizedif:

• He/sheisolderthanage65

• He/shebecomesconfusedabouttime,peopleorplaces(asaresultoftheinfection)

• His/hernauseaandvomitingpreventthepatientfromkeepingdownoralantibiotics

• His/herbloodpressuredrops

• His/herbreathingisrapid

• He/sheneedsbreathingassistance

• His/hertemperatureisbelownormal

Ifthepatientneedstobeplacedonaventilatororthesymptomsaresevere,thepatientmayneedtobeadmittedtoanintensivecareunit.

Mr.Rosario’sguardianseemssurprisedtobeaskedtoconsenttohiswardreceivingantibioticsbecauseoralmedicationsseemasimplesolutiontoapotentiallylife-threateninginfection.Whattheguardianmaynotrealizeisfirst,treatmentmay7TheMayoClinic.Availableat:http://www.mayoclinic.com/health/pneumonia/DS00135/DSECTION=treatments-and-drugs

Developed by Carol Taylor, PhD, RN, Professor, Georgetown University School of Nursing and Health Studies, Kennedy Institute of Ethics Scholar

19

involveparenteralmedications(medicationsdeliveredoutsidethedigestivetract)andrehydrationtherapyandeventransfertoanintensivecareunitforventilatorysupport,andsecond,thereisanactivedebateintheliteratureaboutpneumoniabeingtheoldperson’sfriend,forthosebelievethattherearethingsworsethandeathandwhoprefertodiesoonerratherthanlater.8Likeanyotherproposedmedicaltreatment,antibioticsmayberefusedifajudgmentisreachedthattheyaremedicallyineffectiveoriftheassociatedburdensarejudgedtooutweightheanticipatedbenefits.Atthetimeoftheguardian’slastvisitwithMr.Rosario,Johnwasperceivedasnotbeingmuchdifferentthanbeforehisstagefour-lungcancerwasdiagnosed.Ifthisisthereforeatreatablepneumoniawiththebenefitsoftreatmentoutweighingrelatedburdens,thedecisiontoconsenttoantibioticsseemsimple.UnlesstheguardianhasreasontobelievethatMr.Rosariowouldpreferdeathfromatreatablepneumoniatolivingthelifehehasleftwithhisstagefour-lungcancer—orthattreatmentwouldnotsecurehisbestinterests,treatmentisindicated.Ifyoubegintreatmentandthepneumoniaadvancesrequiringfurtherinterventionsand/orhiscancerprogresseswithnewandproblematiccomplications,thedecisiontotreatthepneumoniacanberevisited.Itisalwaysethicallypermissivetowithdrawatreatmentoncestarted,whichprovestobeineffectiveordisproportionatelyburdensome.Asalways,centraltomakingtreatmentdecisionsisreflectionaboutwhatnotonly“fixes”adiscretemedicalproblem,inthiscaseimpairedbacterialpneumonia,butalsowhatpromotesthewell-beingofthewholeperson.

Theredonotseemtobethirdpartyinterestsatstakeinthisdecision.

c.Establishthehealthcareprofessionals’andguardian’smoral/professionalobligations.Theprimaryobjectofallclinicaldecisionmakingoughttobetosecurethehealth,well-beingorgooddyingofthepatientandtodothiswhilesimultaneouslyrespectingtheintegrityofthepatientandallthoseinvolvedindecisionmakingandimplementingtheplanofcare.Mr.Rosario’sguardianandhealthcareprofessionalsneedtoreflectcarefullyonwhatitisreasonabletoexpectifantibioticsorothermedicaltreatmentsforpneumoniaareinitiated.Ifadecisionismadeatpresentoreventuallytotransitiontopurelypalliativegoalsandtoforegotheantibiotics,everyeffort

8vanderSteenJT,deGraasT,OomsME,vanderWalG,RibbeMW.(October2000).Whenshouldphysiciansforgocurativetreatmentofpneumoniainpatientswithdementia?Usingaguidelinefordecision-making.WesternJournalofMedicine,173(4),274-277.

Developed by Carol Taylor, PhD, RN, Professor, Georgetown University School of Nursing and Health Studies, Kennedy Institute of Ethics Scholar

20

shouldbemadetopreparethepatientforacomfortable,dignifieddeath.Allattentionshouldbedirectedtothepatient(andfamily’sandcaregiver’s)comfortandpeace.Areferralshouldthenbemadetohospice.

4.IdentifyandWeighAlternativeCoursesofActionandThenDecide

Ethicallyrelevantconsiderations1)Balancingbenefitsandharmsinthecareofpatients2)Disclosure,informedconsent,andshareddecisionmaking3)Thenormsoffamilylife4)Therelationshipsbetweencliniciansandpatients5)Theprofessionalintegrityofclinicians6)Cost-effectivenessandallocation7)Issuesofculturalandreligiousvariation8)Considerationsofpower9

Basicallytherearethreeoptionstoconsider.1)Consenttotheuseofantibioticsandacceptastheoverallgoaltostabilizehisfunctioning,treatingeachnewconditionorcomplicationasitarises.2)Attemptatrialbytherapytodetermineifhispneumoniacanbesuccessfullytreatedwithoutfurthercomplicationsanddisproportionatelycompromisinghiswell-being.Herealsotheoverallgoalistostabilizehisfunctioning.Iftheburdensassociatedwithtreatingthepneumoniaorworseningcancersymptomsbecomedisproportionatetothebenefitsassociatedwithtreatment,antibiotictherapyandothertreatmentscanbestoppedandMr.Rosariotransitionedtopurelypalliativegoals.3)MakeadecisionthatMr.Rosario’sinterestsandwell-beingarebestservedbynotattemptingatrialbytherapyandtransitioningimmediatelytothegoalofpreparationforcomfortableanddignifieddeath.Inthisinstanceareferraltohospiceisimperative.UnlessthanisanyreasontobelievethatMr.Rosariowelcomespneumoniaasthe“oldperson’sfriend”andwouldchoosetodiesoonerratherthanlater(anditisdifficulttoimaginehowanyonewouldknowthis)atrialbytherapyshouldbecommencedandantibioticsstarted.Iftheguardian,Mr.Rosario’scaregivers,andhealthcareprofessionalscannotagreeonacourseofaction,referraltoanethicscommitteeorconsultantshouldbemade.9Fletcher,J.C.&Spencer,E.M.(2005).Clinicalethics:History,content,andresources.InJ.C.Fletcher,E.M.Spencer,&P.A.Lombardo,Eds.,Fletcher’sintroductiontoclinicalethics,3rded.Hagerstown,MD:UniversityPublishingGroup,p.12.

Developed by Carol Taylor, PhD, RN, Professor, Georgetown University School of Nursing and Health Studies, Kennedy Institute of Ethics Scholar

21

5.CritiqueWhateveralternativeisselected,onceitisimplementedtheguardianshouldcarefullyfollowtheoutcomestoseewhatcanbelearnedthatwouldbehelpfulinasimilarsituationinthefuture.

Developed by Carol Taylor, PhD, RN, Professor, Georgetown University School of Nursing and Health Studies, Kennedy Institute of Ethics Scholar

22

Scenario #5 1.WhataretheFacts?Denise Miller is a 62-year-old nonverbal female diagnosed with profound intellectual disability (ID). You are her court-appointed guardian. Her medical diagnoses include seizure disorder, Crohn’s disease, diverticulitis, and reflux esophagitis. In 1954 she had a craniotomy for a subdural effusion. She was recently hospitalized after developing cellulitis in her left leg with notable swelling in the shin area. She is on a low fat, chopped diet and has had a history of gastrointestinal (GI) concerns. Admitting diagnosis is osteomyelitis of the left leg (previous rod insertion from a broken leg). She was hospitalized for two months and at some point during her hospitalization she developed a GI bleed and aspirated and had to be transferred to a long term acute care (LTAC) hospital for IV antibiotic treatment of her osteomyelitis and aspiration pneumonia. During her LTAC stay, she stopped eating, had a seizure lasting more than 5 minutes, and was transferred back to the hospital emergency room for further evaluation. While she is at the hospital for treatment of the seizure, you are approached and asked to consent to the placement of a feeding tube because of her decreased appetite and weight loss. 2.Whatistheethicalissue? Shouldyouconsenttoagastrictubetoprovideherwithnutrition? 3.FrametheIssue

a.Identifytheappropriatedecision-makerThefactsaspresenteddemonstratethatMs.Millerisunabletomeetthethreecriteriatodemonstratedecision-makingcapacity:theabilityto1)understandherconditionandtreatmentoptions,2)deliberateinaccordancewithherownvaluesandgoalsandtomakeanun-coerceddecisionamongtreatmentoptions;and3)communicate(verballyornonverbally)thisdecision(HastingsCenterGuidelinesforDecisionsonLifeSustainingTreatmentandCareNeartheEndofLife).Theguardianistheprimarydecision-makerandneedstocreateapartnershipandworkcloselywiththeprofessionalteamtomakeandauthorizetreatmentdecisions.

Developed by Carol Taylor, PhD, RN, Professor, Georgetown University School of Nursing and Health Studies, Kennedy Institute of Ethics Scholar

23

b.Applythecriteriatobeusedinreachingclinicaldecisions

1)Thespecificbiomedicalgoodofthepatient2)Thebroadergoodsandinterestsofthepatient3)Thegoodsandinterestsofotherparties

ThedecisionaboutwhetherornottoinsertagastricfeedingtubewillturnonajudgmentaboutMs.Miller’sabilitytoingestandswallowfoodsafelyinthefuture.Theguardianshouldnotauthorizeplacementofthegastrictubeuntil(s)helearnswhyMs.MillerstoppedeatingintheLTACandsufferedweightloss.Itissadlynotuncommoninnewsettingsforfoodtraystobeplacedinfrontofpatientswithdisabilitieswithoutanyonefirstdeterminingthedegreeofassistanceneededtobringfoodtothemouth.SinceMs.Millerhasalwaysrequiredassistancewithfeeding–itshouldbenosurprisethatmanyfoodtrayswentbacktothekitchenuntouchedifnoassistancewasofferedherintheLTAC.TheguardianshouldrequestthatatrialofofferingassistanceatmealstimebeattemptedandthatMs.Miler’susualcareattendantsbeconsultedaboutherfoodpreferencesandanymealtimeprotocolsthatarefollowedtofacilitatehereating.Alternatively,itmaybethecasethatMs.Miller’sworseningmedicalconditionaggravatedbytheosteomyelitisandgastrointestinalbleedingandnewseizureactivityhaveweakenedhertothedegreethatherreturntoherpre-hospitalizationbaselineisnolongerpossible.Inthisevent,herlossofappetitemaysignalthebody’sbeginningtoslowdown.Ifthisisthecase,therearethreeoptions.Theguardianmightauthorizeatrialofartificialnutritiontoseeifimprovednutritionstrengthenshertothepointthatsheresumesthedesireandabilitytotakefoodsbymouth—inwhichcasetheartificialnutritionwouldbestopped.Alternatively,thegastrictubemaysimplybeplacedandartificialfeedingscontinueduntilthebodycannolongerreceivethem.Thethirdoptionwouldbetotransitiontopurelypalliativegoals,attempthand-feeding,butifitisunsuccessful,makenoefforttoinitiateartificialfeedings—anoptionthatseemsprematureatthispoint.Asinallsituationsdecisionsaboutartificialfeedingentailmakingjudgmentsaboutwhetherornotsuchfeedingisconsistentwiththeoveralltreatmentgoal(stabilizefunctioningorprepareforacomfortableanddignifieddeath)andwhetherornottheanticipatedbenefitsoutweightheburdensassociatedwithartificialfeeding.ItisimportanttorememberthatforindividualslikeMs.Millermealtimesmaybeoneofthemostenjoyabletimesofthedayifthecaregiverusesofferingassistancewithfeedingtodemonstratecompassionateandwarmhumanpresence.Havingsomeonecometoyourroomtodropacanoffeedingsolutionintoabaginnowaycomparestotheexperienceofbeinghandfed.

Developed by Carol Taylor, PhD, RN, Professor, Georgetown University School of Nursing and Health Studies, Kennedy Institute of Ethics Scholar

24

Stoppingtoquestionwhatinfluence,ifany,Ms.Miller’sintellectualdisabilityhasondecision-making,theguardianshouldbeconfidentthat(s)heismakingthesamedecisionforMs.Millerthatwouldbemadeforapersoninasimilarmedicalconditionwhodidnothaveanintellectualdisability.Therearenoimmediatethirdpartiestobeconsideredwhenthisdecisionismade.c.Establishthehealthcareprofessionals’andguardian’smoral/professionalobligations.Theprimaryobjectofallclinicaldecisionmakingoughttobetosecurethehealth,well-beingorgooddyingofthepatientandtodothiswhilesimultaneouslyrespectingtheintegrityofthepatientandallthoseinvolvedindecisionmakingandimplementingtheplanofcare.TheguardianandprofessionalcaregiversshouldworktogethertodevelopaplanforfeedingMs.Millerthatpromotesheroverallwell-being—notonethatmerelysolvestheimmediate“problem”ofweightloss.

4.IdentifyandWeighAlternativeCoursesofActionandThenDecideEthicallyrelevantconsiderations

1)Balancingbenefitsandharmsinthecareofpatients2)Disclosure,informedconsent,andshareddecisionmaking3)Thenormsoffamilylife4)Therelationshipsbetweencliniciansandpatients5)Theprofessionalintegrityofclinicians6)Cost-effectivenessandallocation7)Issuesofculturalandreligiousvariation8)Considerationsofpower10

ThiscasescenarioisinterestingbecausewebasicallyhaveprofessionalcaregiverswantingtobenefitMs.Miller—butmakingdecisionswithaninadequatedatabase.Goodclinicaldecisionscannotbemadewithoutgooddata.Wealsoseeinthiscasethecultureofmedicineprioritizingthetreatmentofmedicalconditions(osteomyelitis,gastrointestinalbleed,seizures)whilesimultaneouslyfailingtopayattentiontothewholeperson—andher/hisneedforassistancewiththesimpleactivitiesofeverydayliving—inthiscase,eating.Itunderscorestheneedforthe10Fletcher,J.C.&Spencer,E.M.(2005).Clinicalethics:History,content,andresources.InJ.C.Fletcher,E.M.Spencer,&P.A.Lombardo,Eds.,Fletcher’sintroductiontoclinicalethics,3rded.Hagerstown,MD:UniversityPublishingGroup,p.12.

Developed by Carol Taylor, PhD, RN, Professor, Georgetown University School of Nursing and Health Studies, Kennedy Institute of Ethics Scholar

25

guardiantohaveestablishedacloserelationshipwiththedailycaregiverswhoknowMs.Millerbestandtobeconfidentinrelayingtheirexperienceandexpertisetoprofessionalcaregiversinthehospital.5.CritiqueWhateveralternativeisselected,onceitisimplementedtheguardianshouldcarefullyfollowtheoutcomestoseewhatcanbelearnedthatwouldbehelpfulinasimilarsituationinthefuture.

THEEND