Norni and Jim talked frankly about ageing and death long before either of them reached old age. They both agreed that they did not want to be kept alive artificially and that they would like to refuse treatment when they no longer had a good quality of life.
When Jim entered residential aged care he specified his wish which was recorded on his file. His wife had a medical power of attorney for him so that she could make decisions about his treatment if he was not able.
After a period of time his health worsened. He no longer knew his wife and suffered pain and discomfort. He suffered many chest infections.
After one particularly bad chest infection Norni spoke to Jim’s doctor and said that she no longer wanted his chest infections to be treated with antibiotics. The doctor knew Jim’s wishes and agreed that this was what he would have wanted.
His next chest infection was his last. He died peacefully and with dignity.
One of the personal care workers was heard to say in the staff room, ‘I can’t believe the doctor didn’t give Jim antibiotics. He would have been alive now if he had. That’s malpractice! His wife probably just wanted his money quicker.’
- How has the personal care worker breached ethical requirements?
- What would have been the ramifications if Jim had been given antibiotics against the instructions of his wife?
- How did the personal care worker’s values differ from those of Norni, Jim and the doctor?
- What action should be taken by the person who heard the personal care worker’s comments?
