We accept

Ethics For The End Of Life Decisions

Ms. Long has been admitted to a skilled nursing home after four weeks in a healthcare facility and has been designated a public guardian (PG) since she actually is no longer in a position to make life decisions on her behalf own (Markkula Middle, 2010). The end-of-life decision must address the moral concerns of beneficence, real human dignity, prepared consent, integrity and totality of the average person. The guardian is confronted with the challenge of deciding whether keeping/sustaining life-giving good care or palliative/hospice good care is appropriate for his or her demand. Given the prognosis of the medical team and an individual assessment, the visible choice would be to exercise the palliative/hospice way. Comfort care at this stage becomes the basic matter. The palliative health care plan should be the consideration for the do-not-resuscitate (DRN) provision. The guardian also needs to consider the alternatives of man-made diet and hydration, as well as cardiopulmonary resuscitation and the option to support life.

The idea of an appointed guardian to be the speech and advocate for a person who is cognitively impaired is a much needed tool and frequently found in the healthcare setting. Regrettably, there are barriers to good guardianship as this service is rife with scams. Since guardianship can remove the basic rights of an individual, making them totally dependent on their advocate, the goal to safeguard the well-being of these demand can be lost.

This research study will present the proposal that palliative good care is the course of choice. It is the responsibility of the guardian to build up an execution plan that delivers continued patient assessment of standard of living, and real human dignity in the totality of the patient's need requirements (Trujillo-Duris, 2010).

Overview and Background

This End- of- Life Decision Making research study from the Markkula Middle, presents a predicament where a public guardian has been appointed for Ms. Long and it is experiencing her for the very first time to create an analysis and make several determinations. One particular determinations is whether Ms. Long is terminally unwell. Upon discovering Ms. Long, the guardian calls for note of the facts. Ms. Long has just been moved from a four month medical center to a skilled nursing center. Ms. Long's health background states that she suffers with severe dementia, diabetes impairing her eye-sight, poor kidney function, has recent, recurrent pneumonia and preceding stokes. The task the guardian faces is, what decisions should be produced that provide the grade of treatment and dignity Ms. Long deserves.

Today the guardian considers that Ms. Long is incredibly slim, and has a big necrotic pressure sore on her behalf sacrum. She has an IV of working essential fluids in her kept arm, and her right arm is limp. Sometimes she actually is in a position to the monitor the movements of the nurse, and sometimes not. She does not give answers to questions, either verbally or with nods, and struggles to concentrate on the individual requesting the questions. The conversation therapist will try to get her to smile, but she does not respond. When Ms. Long is changed, she grimaces and cries out in pain. When offered a straw she accepts it, but does not suck on the straw. She actually is offered snow cream, but after two spoonfuls she has acquired enough and pushes it away, indicating with a slap that she actually is done (Trujillo-Duris, 2010).

The research study does not express whether Ms. Long is terminally sick, which is exactly what the medical doctor would be accountable for deciding, as presented in the prognosis of the individual. "When further treatment to prolong the life of an individual becomes futile, doctors have an obligation to shift the intent of care toward comfort and closure" (AMA, 2010). Given Ms. Long's severe dementia, deterioration of her kidney function, diabetes and her recurrent pneumonia, the assumption here's, the doctor's prognosis is the fact that she actually is terminal. Terminal health problems has been identified by the American Medical Association (AMA), as developing a life expectancy of six months or less. Dementia can affect every patient diversely in duration, and eventually the individual requires complete attention. The question the guardian must answer is whether Ms. Long is at the level of needing palliative services or hospice services. Identifying life expectancy in a patient can be difficult (Trujillo-Duris, 2010).


What is Ethics? Ethics is defined as a certain standard of behavior guiding how exactly we ought to act in situations. The more challenging the moral choice is, the better it is to count on dialogue and dialogue with others about the problem and decision at hand. Aided by other's insights and various perspectives, is a person led into making good ethical selections in complicated situations. (Velasquez, et. al. 2009). A few of the most challenging honest questions in medical treatments circumvent the good care and decision-making at the end-of-life.

There are certain ethical principles the individual should take into account as you approaches end-of-life. These would include the key points of beneficence, human dignity, enlightened consent, and integrity and totality (Ascension Health, 2009). Which means responsibility of the guardian is to make sure that the key points discussed above are honored for Ms. Long.

The process of beneficence is considered the first process of morality and pertains to doing good while preventing evil. This might especially be true within an end-of-life situation, and the role the general public guardian works in the decision making for the patient. The target here would be to ensure that Ms. Long is obtaining the best health care possible to meet her need requirements. These goals should be centered on employing the required life sustaining measures, or providing the best dignity of fatality provisions possible. The key concern of the guardian has been able to distinguish what is appropriate to the given situation.

The basic principle of individuals dignity assumes that each human being should be known as an inherently valuable member of the individual community, as a unique manifestation of life. The inherent dignity of your human being obligates all health care professionals to treat their patient as a whole person and take the time to relieve anguish whenever you can. Ms. Long has the right to life, the to fatality, and the right to healthcare. In end-of-life decision making, the guardian is challenged to observe that Ms. Long obtains the best possible care, whether it is the maintenance of life or preparation for loss of life.

The theory of educated consent is very appropriate in end-of-life situations. The individual will need to have all the reality available to them so that a cogent decision of care and attention may be made, be free to evaluate these details without duress, have the ability to comprehend the amount of the info provided, and become competent to make a decision. Because these criteria cannot be attained, it's the charge of the public guardian to intervene on the best behalf of Ms. Long.

The concepts of integrity and totality apply to the health of the complete person, in identifying the best treatment for the patient. Every patient has a unique set of circumstances that they are interacting with, and medical care team needs to evaluate the patient's needs, and create a care plan accordingly. The public guardian must be capable of inferring what Ms. Long's wishes would be, given that she is not capable of carrying it out herself (Trujillo-Duris, et. al, 2010).

Problem Id & Analysis

Problem Identification

The decision the guardian is faced with is, at what stage of the life/death process is Ms. Long. Once this is determined, then your decision concerning set up guardian should support medical care team in preserving/sustaining life, or encouraging a transition to fatality can be produced. Given the advancements in technology, patients can be looked after for a protracted time period and here's where one needs to understand where in the process the individual is.

Decision making by the public guardian should be considered a careful considered process, based on source from all concerned parties, crafted to safeguard the rights, passions, and wellbeing of the individual which in this case is Ms. Long. Not absolutely all nursing homes have a Palliative Attention Team for the general public guardian to work with. The Country wide Guardianship Connection developed a Criteria of Practice and a Code of Ethics to guide the courtroom appointed guardian. For patients with an incurable, persistent illness, achieving the best quality of life is challenging. Quality of life is subjective and the sole person who can determine what that quality is the average person living that life (Drought, 2010).

Key indicators established by the medical community available to the guardian because of their decision making, can be derived by asking the next questions (WebMD, 2008). Does the patient show extreme sleepiness or weakness? Is there marked changes in the patient's breathing? Are there changes in the patient's visible and hearing functionality? Is there a decrease in appetite and ability to swallow? Is there changes in urinary and colon habits? Are there changes in body's temperature? Are there emotional changes and insufficient consciousness in the patient's environment?

Ms. Long meets at least four of the criteria, therefore the primary decision would show that preparation for the loss of life process is more appropriate than carrying out a maintain/sustain routine. The guardian must work with the health care team to determine what level of palliative and/or hospice care and attention is required, and make the determination of whether do-not-resuscitate (DNR) or cardiopulmonary resuscitation is required.

Palliative Care

Dementia identifies symptoms related to changes in cognition, personality, and patterns (Peterson, 2010). It's very clear that Ms. Long's leading warning sign is that of dementia. The task to the guardian is to be able to determine what Ms. Long truly desires, given her inability to cogently speak her real needs since there is absolutely no family to help identify Ms. Long's choices, ideals, or goals in life or in death. Ms. Long is listless and without concentration. You can easily infer that her action of swatting away a food offering by the conversation therapist had an instantaneous, "I really do not want this food" action, or a longer term, "I really do not want to reside" response.

Sadly, dementia is not typically considered a terminal disease in itself (Sachs, et. al. , 2004), but rather, an incapability of the patient to evaluate or talk for themselves their condition and/or preference of treatment. This will often result in the patient not obtaining the comfort attention they require, and can in some instances, hasten their demise. The health health care team needs reviews from the individual in order that they may assess the potency of the health care being provided. Foundation sores, such as what Ms. Long has, is a perfect sign of the inability of the patient to make the health care team aware of a problem. This in turn can result in gangrene or other issues. Palliative health care has direct honest obligations to the individual, 1) to attain the best quality of life that can be done for the individual, 2) to relieve pain and coping with pain and sign control (Paulas, 2010). Comfort good care is the primary emphasis of palliative care and in Ms. Long's case, it is very important she actually is on the most appropriate pain medication plan, which is in the best apparatus to preclude the event or progression of her foundation sores.

Palliative health care also requires that the guardian is with the capacity of interacting with medical care and attention team as Ms. Long's advocate. This requires that the guardian posses some understanding of medical procedures and operations, as well as knowing what alternatives is open to the individual through the hospital administration or the court system. The guardian must have the ability to ensure that Ms. Long's needs are met, and also take part in your choice making as to when Ms. Long is moved from a medical/palliative attention to hospice care environment.

Do-not-resuscitate (DNR).

DNR is self explanatory when discussing a medical patient, but also offers a legal implication where the decision must be made whether life should be taken care of. A legal paper called a DNR informs medical professionals of the patient's decision to decline CPR, or other life conserving measures if they go into cardiac arrest or stop breathing. Regulations requires that anyplace that offers medical care must do CPR, unless a patient has a signed a DNR (ASCO, 2009). With Ms. Long, being unable to hint a DNR, the guardian will have to see that a DNR is in place, allowing a natural death that occurs. A vital part of palliative care and attention is to consider the process of fatality as an all natural process of life and to help patients realize a peaceful fatality. The End-of-Life Nursing Education Consortium defines a peaceful death as "one that is free of suffering, allows the patient to achieve closure in life and it is consistent with the patient's desires and values" (Paulus, 2010).

Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation

If Ms. Long was to avoid respiration, or her center was to stop pumping and CPR was performed, you might only be delaying the inescapable. Ms. Long is terminally ill, and her standard of living has drastically dropped. She is struggling to move on her behalf own, or speak for herself. She is in apparent pain and she's shown no aspire to preserve herself through food. These are all things that a guardian should consider when trying to help make the best end- of- life decision on behalf of Ms. Long.

Statement of Key Problems/Issues

The key issues the general public guardian must consider should assess the ethical guidelines associated with end-of life decisions necessary for Ms. Long. It is apparent that the grade of life Ms. Long has is substandard, as she actually is barely conscious and capable of getting together with her area. Ms. Long's real human dignity would point out that even though she has a right alive with all other things possible to preserve that life, she also offers the to death where no undue procedures are enacted to avoid this. Ms. Long must be considered in her totality and given that she actually is incapable to do something on her own accord, the general public guardian must provide for her up to date consent.

Alternative Solutions

Artificial Diet and Hydration

When making decisions about diet for patients in the end-of-life phase, family members usually tend to think that if the patient is no more eating and taking nourishment, it is advisable to begin them on IV essential fluids and a nourishing pipe immediately to sustain them. However, this is not always the best step. When making this health decision, the relative or, in Ms. Long's circumstance, the guardian, must consider whether nourishment can in fact bring her back again to health. If the answer is "no", a different nourishment plan is necessary. At this point, medical workers will introduce the thought, but usually not advocate the likelihood of artificial nourishment and hydration (Schultz, 2009).

The caregiver, or guardian, must consider the quality of life that Ms. Long will have after the insertion of your feeding tube and/or intravenous liquids. This process and application can sometimes be quite painful for the recipient. A majority of doctors would also agree that by introducing nourishment into a patient's diet can make the individual more uncomfortable because nourishments have been known to cause bloating, bloating, cramps, and shortness of breathing in older patients (Caring Contacts, 2006). It can be better the individual has only a small amount or all the food as they want and when they need it, until such a time when they can no longer take nourishment for themselves. It's the responsibility of the guardian or the family caregiver to decide when the artificial nutrition is deemed to be an "extraordinary means" for prolonging the life span of an seniors patient. Extraordinary in this case means that the supervision of nutrition and fluids is contrary to your body's natural desire to go into everlasting shutdown. After great account, they may opt to discontinue all nourishment and invite the patient to expire peacefully (Lamers, 2010). This may be what Ms. Long was demonstrating when she swatted the talk therapist's hand away, when seeking to feed her.

Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation (CPR)

CPR is a life sustaining strategy and stands for cardiopulmonary resuscitation. CPR is the task used to fast someone to start breathing, or for their heart to get started on pumping after either has ceased. The procedure is carried out by breasts compressions, mouth area to mouth respiration, placing a pipe through the throat, electric paddles positioned on their torso, or medications given straight into their veins (FCA, 2009).

This life keeping technique is mainly beneficial to folks who are involved in damages, have had a heart attack, or experienced stress. CPR is a lot less effective on individuals who are afflicted with a persistent or terminal illness than those whose need is life conserving. When a terminally ill patient is given CPR, few will recuperate enough to go home (ASCO, 2009). To the individual it is being performed on, CPR itself can be damaging, causing cracked ribs, liver damage, or pain (FCA, 2009). Two very serious difficulties can happen from CPR being directed at a terminally unwell patient. The first problem that might occur is injury to the mind from a insufficiency in oxygen, leaving them in a vegetative condition. The second problem that must be considered is the fact the individual may never inhale on their own again, possibly adding them on life support (ASCO, 2009). For Ms. Long, one would likely be extending her life and then see her not recover, possibly going out of her on life support completely.

Barrier to Good Guardianship

Guardianship often removes the basic privileges from the average person, like the right to make healthcare decisions, make gift ideas, marry, decide where you can live, or to sell property. When the courtroom appoints a guardian to make decisions for someone else, the guardian owes that person a special work of care and accountability. Guardianship should only be used as a final resort. However, a judge may determine a guardianship is the only path to safeguard the assets and provide safety for an adult with reduced capacity. Ensuring good guardianship is determined by the product quality and devotion of the guardian, as well as the oversight of the Court docket (Aging Network, n. d. ). Ms. Long, who's without family, has been appointed a guardian by the courtroom to protect and provide on her behalf.

A disadvantage to an alternative guardianship is based on the actual fact that guardians are at the mercy of court guidance, where agents acting under the energy of attorney are not. Even with guidance, a realtor may misuse and abuse their powers which makes it imperative that health care is used selecting a realtor (Aging Network, n. d. ).

The Centre for Social Gerontology, Inc (TCSG), proven in 1972, is a non-profit research, training, and interpersonal policy group in Ann Arbor, MI, whose purpose is to promote the independence of older folks and their well-being. TCSG has conducted lots of studies to analyze the different areas of the guardianship issue. They studied the way the guardianship system is managed in the courts, the use of mediation in guardianship instances, and examined how to enhance the quality of guardianship providers (TCSG, 2004).

In 1988, the Michigan Legislature enacted the Michigan Guardianship Reform Take action to repay the appointing of guardians for legitimately incapacitated individuals. This function safeguards people that are facing guardianship to the right of counsel, self-employed evaluations, and a reading or a jury trial. A legal choice was stipulated that incomplete guardianships be used for specific decisions, rather than full guardianship total possible life decisions. It also given that guardianship be used only as necessary to be able to market and protect the well-being of the average person (TCSG, 2004). Because of this case study, the guardian sphere of responsibility is bound to Ms. Long's end-of-life decisions.

A TCSG article was highlighted in a Detroit Free Press article on a Michigan talk about audit. This audit of five probate courts stated that the guardians, members of the family, court docket appointed, as well as specialists (law firms), abused their charges by paying expenses later, not accounting for that they spent money, borrowed interest-free money using their company charges to buy things for themselves, and consistently registered inaccurate accounting, all without being held accountable and hardly ever sanctioned. This led to the Michigan Supreme Courtroom creating the duty Push on Guardianships and Conservatorships in 1996 (TCSG, 2004).

Guardianship has truly gone from total control the general public guardians possessed over the life choices of individuals, to mediating other alternatives offering for the individual's need of help, assistance and support. Instead of thinking in conditions of incompetence, new legislation is changing it with assisted competence, to include a variety of aids that will permit individuals with cognitive disabilities, to receive assistance in decision-making that also preserves their protection under the law (Increasing age Network, n. d. ). For the reason why pointed out above, the court docket approved the petition to give a guardian for Ms. Long.

Decisions & Recommendations

The guardian makes a decision that Ms. Long is terminally ill given the fact that she's a brief history of pneumonia [possibly the aspirating kind that precedes death], is getting artificial nourishment and hydration, cannot eat or swallow, is listless and unresponsive, and has foundation sores that point out total incapability of ambulation or movement. The guardian establishes that palliative good care is required, and can recommend to medical good care team that hospice care and attention be looked at. The guardian makes these decisions predicated on Ms. Long's standard of living potential, failure to provide informed consent, examination of the complete person to make sure she has the highest dignity possible as she faces her last troughs with life.

As the guardian evolves the implementation plan, they should include periodic meetings with medical care team, medical doctor, nurses, therapist(s), as well as others that include both the rate of recurrence of review, and provisions for patient treatment plan adjustments. The implementation plan should be flexible enough for contingencies that may be encountered with the patient; deterioration of improvement in condition. This frequency could be less than regular or bi-weekly, or as often as daily, depending on the position and urgency of the health care plan.

The assumption when one gets into hospice, is they are on the final journey of living; that of loss of life. Circumstances may change in the patient's condition that could permit the patient to contribute to their medical care decisions. Ms. Long's capacity, having advanced dementia, would make this possibility highly remote.

The guardian should be questioning themselves to make sure they are interacting with their ethical obligations of their patient, ensuring the complete patient is provided the best quality and dignity of care in their dying occasions. The complete being is what's important.

Examples of completed orders
More than 7 000 students trust us to do their work
90% of customers place more than 5 orders with us
Special price $5 /page
Check the price
for your assignment