This is horrible and wicked and probably darn common. To listen to this is to hear man’s inhumanity to man. The way this woman keeps citing “policy” as the 911 operator begs the woman to hand the phone to a passerby. Yet she refuses and the woman dies. This is chilling and will probably ruin your day. Your welcome.
This is the logical result of an increasingly litigious society that’s losing it’s Christian foundation.
Ace of Spades wrote:
The nursing home defended the inaction, claiming it was a “policy” that nurses should only call 911 and otherwise render no aid themselves.
Let’s take a look at this.
First off, a “policy” exists to protect the institution promulgating that policy, not to help anyone else.
So when a company says “We’re just following policy,” they mean “We’re just following a protocol we created to protect our own interests.”
This is no kind of defense or justification. Yes, I know you were ruthlessly pursuing your own self-interest in permitting a woman to die. Having a “policy” about ruthlessly pursuing your own self-interest in permitting a woman to die doesn’t sanctify that as a noble or even acceptable.
Saying “We have a policy” is just a euphemism for “We’ve collectively decided to look out for ourselves instead of others.”
March 4, 2013 at 9:32 pm
It profits a man nothing to kill someone or let them die because they were "just following ORDERS"…
…but for a POLICY?
March 4, 2013 at 11:34 pm
I hope the state revokes license of the nurse and the facility. Can you imagine such a thing? Her poor family, when researching living facilities, probably never thought to ask, "Oh, by the way, will you perform CPR until an ambulance arrives if she collapses?"
March 5, 2013 at 1:09 am
I dislike the litigious tendency of people today as well, but this cries out for this nursing home to be made an example of. Their calculus of money over life must be changed and if that will work, so be it.
March 5, 2013 at 1:17 am
I'm as pro-life as one can be, BUT as the wife of a critical care doctor, I believe that it was this 87 year old woman's time to go to God. If they had done CPR, the BEST outcome would be that she'd be in an ICU hooked up to machines and unconscious. She would not be playing bridge with her friends.
March 5, 2013 at 10:51 am
Laurrie, you are right on. The people who comment that she should be saved need to realize that most people in nursing homes are sitting around in diapers in front of a tv. The nurse didn't kill this lady. She died naturally and not alone. That's more than a lot of our elderly have to look forward to.
March 5, 2013 at 10:52 am
People who think she should have CPR don't know what happens to these poor souls when they reach a hospital. They are absolutely tortured until they have the luxury of dying again in a couple of more weeks.
March 5, 2013 at 12:00 pm
Speaking as a Catholic priest, CPR can indeed qualify as 'extraordinary measures' in this case – CPR is inherently 'violent' and can shatter the fragile bones of an elderly patient. It may indeed be a morally correct decision to withhold that, even though of course the person will die. Someone in that level of physical frailness will not do well at all with several shattered ribs or other fractures.
March 6, 2013 at 1:38 am
Except I thought this was an independent living facility, and not a nursing home? People in these types of places are not usually frail and are typically in good health considering their age.
March 6, 2013 at 1:39 am
Except I thought this was an independent living facility, and not a nursing home? People in these types of places are not usually frail and are typically in good health considering their age.
March 6, 2013 at 3:27 am
One who would ordinarily be healthy enough for "independent living" would probably see their health take a sharp dip after having ribs broken by CPR, is I imagine what Fr. Denis is referring to. More than two broken ribs is not a minor injury even for a young person.
I don't know that CPR does count as "extraordinary measures", but the attitude the facility took was legally and morally negligent.