Black hearted post of the day

PMeg819

I don't know why people got up in arms about that "nurse" not administering CPR to the woman in the nursing home.

The woman was in a nursing home. Old people don't live forever. I fail to see how the alternative: alive, sickly, and in a hospital is a better one.

I know, I hate old people and all that. But at some time we have to consider this: we can use life saving measures or we can be realistic. Sometimes, prolonging Grandma isn't very nice for her just because you want another birthday card with $5.

6fsn

My understanding was that it was an assisted living home and the woman did not have a DNR. 

GBCK

I so have missed whatever story is being talked about...

But my family refused to put in a feeding tube and we were told how 'awful' we were.  My dad was basically set to take it to court when the nursing home decided to quit fighting us.
Bastards.
(of course, the feeding tube was 'necessary' because she would die w/o it...and she lived on mostly as a vegetable, without said tube for like 4 more years)

(and I'm fairly sure everyone here knows that I thought the world of my grandparents.  They're people I'm damn lucky to have been privledged to know, let alone be related to.  And letting go is hard...and necessary)

VarunaTT

Link to the story?  I hadn't read it.

6fsn

This is one story I found.  It was not a nurse that refused so I do cut her a little slack, but the 911 call implies she barely tried to help this woman.  It was an independent living facility so this wasn't a woman that couldn't care for herself.

http://abcnews.go.com/Health/staff-refuse-cpr-elderly-woman-facility/story?id=18648941

GBCK

OK, I read it.

But I'm thinking that's not a "time to let her go" story as much as it is "I just WORK here, I don't actually want to touch old people" story.

If my gramps were still here and he was in that facility, I'd pull him out and find him someplace else ASAP.

6fsn

Of course then this says the woman didn't want intervention  So if it's a receptionist and the woman didn't want it, then I see no outrage.

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2013/03/05/spokesman-says-woman-who-refused-to-give-cpr-to-dying-87-year-old-wasnt-nurse/

VarunaTT

I think the person is an a$$hat for sure.  I really can't imagine a person not wanting to try and help and/or having a reason that I would think is reasonable, to not help.

But I sure as hell don't think the consequence should be a law saying you have to do what the 911 operator tells you to do.  No.  Way.

GBCK

In Response to <a href="http://forums.theknot.com/Sites/theknot/Pages/Main.aspx/special-topic-wedding-boards_wedding-woes_black-hearted-post-of-the-day-1?plckFindPostKey=Cat:Special Topic Wedding BoardsForum:47Discussion:19b39e6f-d660-4e9d-9d73-4bff5aed8082Post:c62f2d78-79a1-4faa-81d9-2a80067ed3ac">Re: Black hearted post of the day</a>:
[QUOTE]I think the person is an a$$hat for sure.  I really can't imagine a person not wanting to try and help and/or having a reason that I would think is reasonable, to not help. <strong>But I sure as hell don't think the consequence should be a law saying you have to do what the 911 operator tells you to do.  No.  Way.
</strong>Posted by VarunaTT[/QUOTE]

True.
I'd rather make sure that policy is clear @ the home and all that jazz.
But I'm guessing "now you know that only a nurse will give CPR, and only between 9 and 5, there are only receptionists @ night" was discussed w/ family.

GBCK

although, huh, fox news does kinda say that ^that conversation was had w/ family.

Well then, I rescind my outrage.
Although the fact that staff is blurry on it still has me raising an eyebrow.
Stuff like that has to be spelled out or people die accidentally.

not having a DNR on file @ the home = huge mistake.

MNNEBride

Link to the story:

http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/ca-woman-87-dies-nurse-refuses-cpr-18645317

y'all beat me to it.

dharmabunny

In Response to Re:Black hearted post of the day:[QUOTE]OK, I read it.But I'm thinking that's not a "time to let her go" story as much as it is "I just WORK here, I don't actually want to touch old people" story.If my gramps were still here and he was in that facility, I'd pull him out and find him someplace else ASAP. Posted by GBCK[/QUOTE]

That was my take on the whole story, not really as much of a DNR issue. It reminded me of several jobs where medical mingles with all skill levels and where a VERY clear line was drawn as to who is authorized to do what. Especially in old folks homes where the lawsuits go flying and folks end up dead. Nurses don't do anything that an EMS or a doctor is authorized to do, aides don't do anything a nurse is supposed to do. For instance when I worked at a day camp, counselors were NOT allowed to remove splinters, even if the splinter was sticking out. That was considered surgery.

Although I wonder if they thought about Good Samaritan laws. But that might involve someone really taking the initiative to care more than just their job.

NOLABridesmaid

I'm not that lady, but I don't think I could have not tried to help.

alikatt17

I couldn't just sit by and watch someone die without trying to help.  F*ck my job and what I'm supposed to do or not do.

Wzz

just because old people don't live forever doesn't mean their life isn't worth saving. as someone with no emotional ties to the old person, it is not the "nurse's" right to determine when the person's quality of life isn't worth anything.

VarunaTT

That family seems to be a class act.  What a great statement.

We have those elderly communities here.  They are very clear in their rules that they offer A, B, C and not X, Y, Z.  None of the ones I've been in here offer any sort of medical treatments/facilities.  It's usually the community planning (they plan lots of events, that's why I've been there with theatre/singing troupes) and cleaning house stuff.  Plus some personal things, like someone who'll go grocery shopping for you, pick up your medications, etc.  Wider hallways to accommodate wheelchairs, hospital beds, etc.

thejucheidea

I think it just proves that the job market's bad enough that the nurse is afraid to go against the policies of her employer over her own feelings in the matter in order to retain her job.

**O-Face**

I'm with ahstillwell.  What ever happened to just doing what you should (morality comes in here, I don't care) as a human being?

Job requirements or duties, be damned.

thejucheidea

You also run into the area of litigiousness. What if she had helped but the patient still died? Would the family sue, stating that there hadn't been enough done to help her? If she'd gone against company policy, would the company protect her using their liability insurance? By saying that she did it according to company policy, if the policy does indeed state that there should be no intervention, then the company is the one to catch the brunt of it.

What if she had, in fact, been a DNR and they didn't check before instituting life-saving measures? She could have been brought back with (likely) multiple rib fractures and the ramifications of oxygen deprivation. What if the family had decided to sue at that point?

Healthcare is a minefield. It sucks.

6fsn

In Response to <a href="http://forums.theknot.com/Sites/theknot/Pages/Main.aspx/special-topic-wedding-boards_wedding-woes_black-hearted-post-of-the-day-1?plckFindPostKey=Cat:Special Topic Wedding BoardsForum:47Discussion:19b39e6f-d660-4e9d-9d73-4bff5aed8082Post:a800f4c7-ba3b-4df5-88bc-49577f179e8d">Re: Black hearted post of the day</a>:
[QUOTE]You also run into the area of litigiousness. What if she had helped but the patient still died? Would the family sue, stating that there hadn't been enough done to help her? If she'd gone against company policy, would the company protect her using their liability insurance? By saying that she did it according to company policy, if the policy does indeed state that there should be no intervention, then the company is the one to catch the brunt of it. What if she had, in fact, been a DNR and they didn't check before instituting life-saving measures? She could have been brought back with (likely) multiple rib fractures and the ramifications of oxygen deprivation. What if the family had decided to sue at that point? Healthcare is a minefield. It sucks.

Posted by ahstillwell[/QUOTE]

Sounds more like law is the issue.

thejucheidea

In Response to <a href="http://forums.theknot.com/Sites/theknot/Pages/Main.aspx/special-topic-wedding-boards_wedding-woes_black-hearted-post-of-the-day-1?plckFindPostKey=Cat:Special Topic Wedding BoardsForum:47Discussion:19b39e6f-d660-4e9d-9d73-4bff5aed8082Post:7acba6f6-a598-4816-ab7f-0d1957dc9555">Re: Black hearted post of the day</a>:
[QUOTE]In Response to Re: Black hearted post of the day : Sounds more like law is the issue.
Posted by 6fsn[/QUOTE]

Law and healthcare are so intimately acquainted these days that sometimes it's hard to tell the difference.

VarunaTT

That's what the Good Samaritan laws protect.  If you were trying to help and inadvertantly made something worse, you're not held liable.  Each state is different though w/how it's applied.  I would figure CAs would be fairly liberal in application, but you never know.

thejucheidea

In Response to <a href="http://forums.theknot.com/Sites/theknot/Pages/Main.aspx/special-topic-wedding-boards_wedding-woes_black-hearted-post-of-the-day-1?plckFindPostKey=Cat:Special Topic Wedding BoardsForum:47Discussion:19b39e6f-d660-4e9d-9d73-4bff5aed8082Post:1c992893-89e8-45d5-abb1-257766b7166d">Re: Black hearted post of the day</a>:
[QUOTE]That's what the Good Samaritan laws protect.  If you were trying to help and inadvertantly made something worse, you're not held liable.  Each state is different though w/how it's applied.  I would figure CAs would be fairly liberal in application, but you never know.
Posted by VarunaTT[/QUOTE]

I know that Good Samaritan laws apply to the general public, but do they apply in a work environment that has a policy regarding intervention?

Laws are weird when it comes to medical personel -- for example, if I identify myself as a nurse in an emergency situation, I'm bound by law to stay there until someone with equal or greater medical power shows up. I've had to stay with the victims of two accidents (one where a guy in Seattle got run over by an amphibious vehicle near Pike Place and another being a car accident near our house) until EMTs showed up because of this. If I didn't stay, I could be prosecuted for abandoning a patient, at least in the State of Tennessee.

jojobrn

In Response to <a href="http://forums.theknot.com/Sites/theknot/Pages/Main.aspx/special-topic-wedding-boards_wedding-woes_black-hearted-post-of-the-day-1?plckFindPostKey=Cat:Special%20Topic%20Wedding%20BoardsForum:47Discussion:19b39e6f-d660-4e9d-9d73-4bff5aed8082Post:a800f4c7-ba3b-4df5-88bc-49577f179e8d">Re: Black hearted post of the day</a>:
[QUOTE]You also run into the area of litigiousness. What if she had helped but the patient still died? Would the family sue, stating that there hadn't been enough done to help her? If she'd gone against company policy, would the company protect her using their liability insurance? By saying that she did it according to company policy, if the policy does indeed state that there should be no intervention, then the company is the one to catch the brunt of it. What if she had, in fact, been a DNR and they didn't check before instituting life-saving measures? She could have been brought back with (likely) multiple rib fractures and the ramifications of oxygen deprivation. What if the family had decided to sue at that point? Healthcare is a minefield. It sucks.
Posted by ahstillwell[/QUOTE]<div>
</div><div>Word.

</div>

nmccrary

i think it's about the services you are paying for.  most people put their relatives in a home because they can't take care of them theirselves.  this means you are PAYING someone to take care of them for you.  i think it's assumed that they would perform the most basic of duties, like trying to save your life.  i'm not sure how anyone could just sit there and watch someone die.  why did she even call 911 if she wasn't planning on helping her?  i work in a hospital and they have what's called a "slow code" where you just go through the motions of saving someone but actually do nothing.  they easily could have done that.

thejucheidea

In Response to <a href="http://forums.theknot.com/Sites/theknot/Pages/Main.aspx/special-topic-wedding-boards_wedding-woes_black-hearted-post-of-the-day-1?plckFindPostKey=Cat:Special%20Topic%20Wedding%20BoardsForum:47Discussion:19b39e6f-d660-4e9d-9d73-4bff5aed8082Post:05877e9c-3d24-42d5-86bb-6d50d28ef9f1">Re: Black hearted post of the day</a>:
[QUOTE]i think it's about the services you are paying for.  most people put their relatives in a home because they can't take care of them theirselves.  this means you are PAYING someone to take care of them for you.<strong>  i think it's assumed that they would perform the most basic of duties, like trying to save your life.</strong>  i'm not sure how anyone could just sit there and watch someone die.  why did she even call 911 if she wasn't planning on helping her? <strong> i work in a hospital and they have what's called a "slow code" where you just go through the motions of saving someone but actually do nothing. </strong> they easily could have done that.
Posted by nmccrary[/QUOTE]
You assume too much. If it's not the company's policy to perform CPR, then it's not the company's policy to perform CPR. Apparently it was their policy to call EMS and stay with the patient.

So... what's the difference between what you're calling a slow code and not doing anything and waiting for EMS to get there? The nurse should have pretended to do CPR? I'm sure that would ameliorate the situation.