"Do Not Resuscitate"

Paper Summary:

This paper explains that, although living wills and "Do Not Resuscitate" (DNR) orders are common methods used by patients and their families to indicate their wishes during times of hospitalization and treatment, there are so many exceptional cases and circumstances surrounding these issues that they are continually controversial and test the bio-ethical standards of the medical and legal communities. The author points out that, while every state now recognizes advance directives and DNRs, they can be interpreted differently in each state due to laws and legislation. The author also explains that many physicians, fearful of legal reprisals, judge each advance directive on a case-by-case basis and are reluctant to abide by the directives if the case is even the slightest bit unusual or questionable.

From the Paper:

"To a family member or patient, the idea of a Living Will or "Do Not Resuscitate" order many seem binding and unquestionable. However, many circumstances challenge these orders, and the ethics of carrying them out are sometimes convoluted and questionable. For example, one cited case involved a 21-year old pregnant female diagnosed with "PCP (pneumocystis carinii pneumonia), right parietal infarct (a blood clot in her brain) with left hemiplegia, and CMV (cytomegalovirus, an infection similar to mononucleosis)". It was discovered the woman was also HIV-positive, and there was a great possibility her unborn child was also HIV-positive."

More papers on "Do Not Resuscitate":

• Argumentative Essay # 69029 : "The Do-Not-Resuscitate Policy"
• Argumentative Essay # 63540 : "A "Do-Not-Resuscitate" - DNR Order"
• Research Paper # 94047 : "Unilateral Do Not Resuscitate Orders (DNR)"
• Case Study # 109000 : "Ethical Issue: Do Not Resuscitate"

APA Citation:

MLA Citation: