It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by ThirdEyeofHorus
The news report says that the Home has a policy against CPR. Interesting....
ah and the 911 operator says that EMS would take LIABILITY and it's protocol.
Originally posted by ThirdEyeofHorus
Originally posted by mugger
It is unfortunate this lady died. Blame it on the lawyers. There is no way the nurse can know everyone's death wishes to do not resuscitate orders(if they have one).
This was not the case,If lady had a DNR order and the nurse performed CPR and saved her...big lawsuit.
The article states the woman did not have a DNR order.
End of that discussion, unless the journalist got it wrong. Would the nurse have known it if the woman had a DNR or not, I would hope so. If she didn't have that info handy, could she have gotten it?
The family of an 87-year-old woman who was denied CPR at a California independent living home by a woman who identified herself to a 911 dispatcher as a nurse says she chose to live in a facility without medical staff and wanted to pass away without life-prolonging intervention.
The family of Lorraine Bayless told the Associated Press they do not plan to sue the facility where the 87-year-old woman died last week.
The family says they understand the widely played 911 tape in which a dispatcher pleads with a nurse to start CPR "has caused concern" nationwide.
The statement says the family regrets that "this private and personal time has been escalated by the media."
Read more: www.foxnews.com...
It prompted calls for legislation Monday to prevent a repeat of what happened Feb. 26 at Glenwood Gardens in Bakersfield.
She lived in the independent living building, which state officials said is like a senior apartment complex and doesn't operate under licensing oversight.
"This is a wakeup call," said Assemblywoman Mariko Yamada, chair of the California Assembly Aging and Long-term Care Committee. "I'm sorry it took a tragedy like this to bring it to our attention."
Independent living facilities "should not have a policy that says you can stand there and watch somebody die," said Pat McGinnis, founder of California Advocates for Nursing Home Reform, a consumer advocacy group. "How a nurse can do that is beyond comprehension."
"The consensus is if they are a nurse and if they are at work as a nurse, then they should be offering the appropriate medical care," said Russ Heimerich, spokesman for the California Board of Registered Nursing, the agency that licenses health care providers.
The situation described in the op I've seen happen on hospital wards. It was quite upsetting for me. I just had to stand and watch while an old lady screamed for help and eventually passed away. The Nurses and Doctors present seemed to think all was in order.
The family's statement to the Associated Press absolving an elder care home of blame came less than 1-and-a-half hours before the company issued a statement saying the employee's failure to heed a 911 dispatcher's was the result of a misunderstanding of the company's emergency medical practices
The nurse's decision has prompted multiple state and local investigations.
The California attorney general was "aware" of the incident, said a spokeswoman, Lynda Gledhill. Bakersfield police were trying to determine whether a crime was committed when the nurse refused to assist the 911 dispatcher looking for someone to start CPR.
The nation's largest trade group for senior living facilities has called for its members to review policies that employees might interpret as edicts to not cooperate with emergency responders.
Originally posted by NellahB
From what I've read about the patient, she was a NO CODE! You do know that means no CPR, resuscitation, etc. You'd better not go against a person's NO CODE.
City fire officials say Bayless did not have a "do not resuscitate" order on file at the home. The family and the company have not commented
Originally posted by NellahB
From what I've read about the patient, she was a NO CODE! You do know that means no CPR, resuscitation, etc. You'd better not go against a person's NO CODE.
Originally posted by flice
There's so little info in this stury that it is imoossible for any of you to make a sound judgement over this death.
My gf works in this field... tending the elderly. I asked her what the policies are in Danish homes and facilities and she said its both a judgement call and a contract one. You would be surprised how many elderly have signed DNRs simply to keep the family from making that awful decission.
I think its because most of you cant relate to what it is like to reach the near end of your life and be in pain day in and day out. Go see Amour..... experience the end of life for good or bad.
In cases where there is no DNR but a very ill person who basically would suffer more being alive, the personal most commonly hurries to get an ER unit slowly.......
Dont pass judgement on other peoples lives or pretend to think you know what they would want or what is best for them when all you can think about is living at what ever cost.
I highly question this alleged "knowledge" of a DNR or not
hard to fathom that a simple lack of action has invited a slew of legal and moral arguments. The Good Samaritan laws come into play, especially since they vary by state. Simply put, the nurse’s role in the woman’s death is an ethical disgrace. In an age where companies and employers fear any form of liability, instances such as this unfortunately occur. One should not have to convince someone to do the right thing, but apparently you do.
When any doctor of medicine or dentistry, nurse, member of any organized rescue squad, member of any police or fire department, member of any organized volunteer fire department, emergency medical technician, intern or resident practicing in a hospital with training programs approved by the American Medical Association, state trooper, medical aidman functioning as a part of the military assistance to safety and traffic program, chiropractor, or public education employee gratuitously and in good faith, renders first aid or emergency care at the scene of an accident, casualty, or disaster to a person injured therein, he or she shall not be liable for any civil damages as a result of his or her acts or omissions in rendering first aid or emergency care, nor shall he or she be liable for any civil damages as a result of any act or failure to act to provide or arrange for further medical treatment or care for the injured person.
Any person who in good faith renders emergency care, without renumeration or expectation of renumeration, at the scene of an accident or emergency to the victim of the accident or emergency shall not be liable for any civil damages resulting from the persons acts or omission, except for such damages as may result from the persons gross negligence or wanton acts or omissions."