Starving the Elderly: A Sign of the Times?
This story out of the UK is disturbing and a warning about where the "quality of life" ethic can take us. A 91-year old had a stroke. Rather than treat her, her family charges, doctors instead let her lie in bed and die of starvation. This, even though she begged for food!
We have no grounds for looking down our noses. In Florida, Marjorie Nighbert was dehydrated to death by court order even though she begged for food. As I described in Culture of Death: As she slowly dehydrating to death, Marjorie began to ask the staff for food:
"She was saying things like, 'Please feed me, I'm hungry, I'm thirsty, and I want food,'" attorney William F. Stone told me, who briefly represented Marjorie as a court-appointed guardian. In response to her pleas, members of the nursing staff surreptitiously gave her small amounts of food and water. One eventually blew the whistle, leading to a state investigation and a brief restraining order requiring that Marjorie be nourished
Stone was appointed Marjorie's temporary guardian by Circuit Court Judge Jere Tolton, who instructed Stone to conduct a twenty-four hour inquiry, the sole issue being whether Marjorie was competent to rescind her power of attorney and make her own decisions. After the rushed investigation, Stone was forced to report to the judge that she was not competent at that time. She had, after all been intentionally malnourished for several weeks. Stone particularly noted that he had been unable to determine whether she was competent when the dehydration commenced.
With Stone's report in hand, the judge decided to allow the dehydration to be completed, apparently on the theory that Marjorie did not have the competence to request the medical treatment of food and water. Nighbert died on April 6, 1995. Stone told me he would have appealed but he, and his client, ran out of time.
posted by Wesley J. Smith @ 1:31 PM
5 Comments
5 Comments:
Wesley, can you comment on the hospital's claim that they were unable to insert an NG tube?
If true, it's of course my opinion that they should certainly have put in the stomach tube.
But what might cause such problems inserting an NG tube?
I ask because I have known of a case of a stroke victim who was terribly thirsty and was given only a drip and no NG tube. They claimed that the minor surgery for a stomach tube posed too great a risk because of a heart problem. (But of course if you don't get food you'll die, so what kind of risk is that?) But I never could understand why an NG tube wasn't administered. This was an acquaintance of mine only, so I heard all information about his case indirectly and had no standing or opportunity to question doctors.
Is there something about stroke patients that can make it impossible to put in an NG tube?
In that case, families shd. be able to demand the stomach tube.
At least there's an inquest in this case. I hope the doctors get the book thrown at them.
That is beyond my pay grade. But someone asking for food should certainly receive it.
"Wesley, can you comment on the hospital's claim that they were unable to insert an NG tube?"
The literature speaks about the gag reflex or vomiting--but says that you have suctioning available in case of that. I'm going to ask my nurse paralegal about this. It sounds fishy to me.
"Wesley, can you comment on the hospital's claim that they were unable to insert an NG tube?"
According to my nurse paralegal, this sounds like hogwash. If the patient was combative, sedation was the answer. Although there can be difficulties in inserting such a tube in some people, there are methods for dealing with that.
I think that this was simply a version of "slow-coding".
Jerri: For our many visitors, would you please describe "slow code?" And has it ever been proved? Thanks.
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home