Mrs. M was diagnosed with acute anterior myocardial infarction. In addition to the first diagnosis, Mrs. M was also diagnosed with acute pancreatitis, disseminated intravascular coagulation, acute respiratory failure, and lactic acidosis. A look into Mrs. M’s patient history revealed that she had at one time suffered from anxiety and depression, for which she received treatment accordingly. As part of her treatment regimen, Mrs. M was placed on a ventilator to aid with her breathing (Burns, 28).
During the initial stages of her hospitalization, the first three days to be precise, Mrs. M was conscious of her environment and was medically responsive. During this time also, Mrs. M was informed of one of the option, that although it involved a high risk and extensive medical procedure, it had the potential to significantly improve the quality of her life. Mrs. M made a decision which was deemed to be informed. She did not wish to go through with the procedure, but instead opted to be withdrawn from the ventilator.
The attending physician was initially in agreement with Mrs. M’s and her close family members’ decision. However, after a short while, on the fourth day of hospitalization to be precise, the physician proved to be rather hesitant in assisting with the ventilator withdrawal. This was informed by among other things, the age of the patient, which was according to the physician not so advanced as compromise her ability to rally medically (Ferrell & Coyle, 72).
In addition to that, the physician expressed doubt on whether Mrs. M was adequately competent to make such a decision, given her past history with anxiety and depression (Kuczewski & Pinkus, 71) This change on the physician’s stand had the effect of angering both Mr. M and Martha (Mrs. M’s Daughter), who promised the patient that they would take appropriate action, in order to ensure that her wishes were honored.
Devetterre points out that the presence of family members is an important aspect, as far as making such a decision is concerned (169). In this case, Mrs. M expressed her wish to the physician and her close family members, both of whom were in agreement with her decision (Gamino & Hal Ritter, 139).
Moreover, Mrs. M expressed her decision while she was conscious enough, and after being made fully aware of her conditions, as well as the options that were available to her medically. This places the physician in a dilemma, where they have to choose between respecting the patient’s wishes or doing the right thing (Becvar, 104). In addition to that, Mrs. M had a sound mind at the time of expressing her wishes, and having been furnished with all the relevant information, she had the right to make such a decision (Becvar, 106).
In the United States, assisted suicide is illegal in almost all states. However, withdrawal of life support equipment does not necessarily qualify as assisted suicide. Pope and Vasquez (183) point out that life support equipment, such as a ventilator, can be legally withdrawn provided that it has fulfilled the two legal requirements of informed consent and refusal.
Informed consent requires that consent should be given by either the patient, if they are competent enough, or the patient’s caregivers incase the patient is not able to make such a decision (Bernat, 171). Informed refusal on its part requires that either the caregivers or the patient have been informed of their options medically, but have chosen to refuse to go through with these options (Margolis, 17). In the case of Mrs. M, both these two requirements are present, thus exalting the physician from any legal liability.
Hence, withdrawal of medical equipment by its very nature is a way of aiding a person to die, and therefore when it comes to religious ethics and Christianity in particular, such an act contravenes the teachings of Christianity (Michael & Murray, 77). This is because Christianity teaches us that life is a gift from God and only God has the right to decide when life begins and when it ends.
Works Cited
Becvar, Dorothy. In the Presence of Grief: Helping Family Members Resolve Death, Dying, and Bereavement Issues. San Diego: Harcourt Mifflin, 2003. Print.
Bernat, James. Ethical Issues in Neurology. New York: Lippincott &Wilkins, 2008. Print.
Burns, Editor. Care of Mechanically Ventilated Patients. London: Jones & Bartlett, 2008. Print.
Devettere, Raymond. Practical Decision Making in Health Care Ethics: Cases and Concepts. Boston: John Wiley & Sons, 2009. Print.
Ferrell, Betty and Coyle Nessa. Oxford Textbook of Palliative Nursing. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2010. Print.
Gamino, Louis and Hal Ritter Rye. Ethical Practice in Grief Counseling. London: Routledge, 2009. Print.
Kuczewski, Mark and Pinkus Ritter. An Ethics Case Book for Hospitals: Practical Approaches to Everyday Cases. Washington D.C.: Georgetown University Press, 1999. Print.
Margolis, Harry. Elder Law Portfolio. Michigan: Aspen, 1995. Print.
Michael, Michael and James Murray. Critical Care Medicine: Perioperative Management. London: Lippincott &Wilkins, 2002. Print.
Pope, Kenneth and Melba Vasquez. Ethics in Psychotherapy and Counseling: A Practical Guide. Boston: John Wiley & Sons, 2010. Print.