Hospitals Using COVID-19 To Establish Policies To Stand Down When Patients Have “Do Not Resuscitate”
COVID-19, the coronavirus that keeps on giving. Friends, this is about as serious as it gets so I’ll get straight to the point. Hospitals around the united States are considering enacting a universal DO NOT RESUSCITATE order on COVID-19 patients whose heart or breathing stops against the wishes of the family and/or patient due to a shortage of personal protective equipment. Basically, these hospitals are implementing euthanasia without consent or through coercive techniques in order to deny treatment and emergency measures because of a shortage of gloves, gowns, masks, head coverings, etc.
The Washington Post has the story.
Hospitals on the front lines of the pandemic are engaged in a heated private debate over a calculation few have encountered in their lifetimes — how to weigh the “save at all costs” approach to resuscitating a dying patient against the real danger of exposing doctors and nurses to the contagion of coronavirus.
The conversations are driven by the realization that the risk to staff amid dwindling stores of protective equipment — such as masks, gowns and gloves — may be too great to justify the conventional response when a patient “codes,” and their heart or breathing stops.
Northwestern Memorial Hospital in Chicago has been discussing a do-not-resuscitate policy for infected patients, regardless of the wishes of the patient or their family members — a wrenching decision to prioritize the lives of the many over the one.
Let me say this; part of the job of being a nurse or doctor is knowing that you will be exposed to some infectious pathogens. Regardless of the risk, nurses and doctors cannot stop doing their jobs because of “fear” of being infected. And, when working in a hospital that has various infectious pathogens from patients, an immunity is built against those pathogens to some extent. There are some pathogens that one cannot build an immunity. But, regardless, medical professionals do their duty – at least they did until coronavirus hit the scene.
Continuing, The Washington Post reported:
Richard Wunderink, one of Northwestern’s intensive-care medical directors, said hospital administrators would have to ask Illinois Gov. J.B. Pritzker for help in clarifying state law and whether it permits the policy shift.
“It’s a major concern for everyone,” he said. “This is something about which we have had lots of communication with families, and I think they are very aware of the grave circumstances.”
Officials at George Washington University Hospital in the District say they have had similar conversations, but for now will continue to resuscitate covid-19 patients using modified procedures, such as putting plastic sheeting over the patient to create a barrier. The University of Washington Medical Center in Seattle, one of the country’s major hot spots for infections, is dealing with the problem by severely limiting the number of responders to a contagious patient in cardiac or respiratory arrest.
In essence, this is wartime medical triage – the worst go last because the patient would use up too many resources that could be used to save those better off. But, we are not at war. Moreover, this is also a tenet of socialized medicine – rationing of care to the most critical to care for those who are less critical. It’s a method of kulling the population through ridding society of what some determine “worthless”. It’s a deplorable and disgusting practice.
Who would be affected by this “policy” should hospitals being implementing it all over the country? It would be the elderly, those with immune-suppression, individuals with underlying auto-immune disorders, those with lung and heart conditions, and the very young whose immune system is still developing. If you or one of your family members fall into this category, hospitals, without permission, are declaring you unworthy to live because of a lack of equipment.
This is wading into dangerous territory because of Obamacare regulations that are still in place and the push for euthanasia to be adopted by all States in the union. Moreover, the push toward socialized medicine by the powers that be will see the above categories of individuals sacrificed on the notion of the “needs of the many, outweigh the needs of the one or the few”. There goes the right to life given by God.
While many will say these are hard choices that have to be made because these are difficult times, it will change once the shoe is on their foot and doctors are asking them to sacrifice themselves or their family member for “the greater good”. The notion of “slow code” or less than rapid response with heroic measures and diminished care is already in play when a patient has a Do Not Resuscitate order in their medical record. I’ve seen it in operation.
This scenario is a euthanasia supporting group’s “sexual” dream. Advocates for euthanasia/physician-assisted suicide, aka murder by physician are using COVID-19 to push their agenda of death on the premise of “never let a good crisis go to waste”. With hospitals and health care facilities supposedly experiencing shortages of PPE, these advocates have achieved an unintentional ally for promotion of euthanasia based on “fear”.
And it gets even better as The Washington Post indicated.
Several large hospital systems — Atrium Health in the Carolinas, Geisinger in Pennsylvania and regional Kaiser Permanente networks — are looking at guidelines that would allow doctors to override the wishes of the coronavirus patient or family members on a case-by-case basis due to the risk to doctors and nurses, or a shortage of protective equipment, say ethicists and doctors involved in those conversations. But they would stop short of imposing a do-not-resuscitate order on every coronavirus patient. The companies declined to comment. [Emphasis Mine.]
Lewis Kaplan, president of the Society of Critical Care Medicine and a University of Pennsylvania surgeon, described how colleagues at different institutions are sharing draft policies to address their changed reality.
“We are now on crisis footing,” he said. “What you take as first-come, first-served, no-holds-barred, everything-that-is-available-should-be-applied medicine is not where we are. We are now facing some difficult choices in how we apply medical resources — including staff.” [Emphasis Mine.]
Does this make it clear where medical care is going during this “crisis” that will be the playbook for everything going forward? If not, you are beyond hope and no one can help you to understand.
The new protocols are part of a larger rationing of lifesaving procedures and equipment — including ventilators — that is quickly becoming a reality here as in other parts of the world battling the virus. The concerns are not just about health-care workers getting sick but also about them potentially carrying the virus to other patients in the hospital.
- Alta Charo, a University of Wisconsin-Madison bioethicist, said that while the idea of withholding treatments may be unsettling, especially in a country as wealthy as ours, it is pragmatic. “It doesn’t help anybody if our doctors and nurses are felled by this virus and not able to care for us,” she said. “The code process is one that puts them at an enhanced risk.”
Wunderink said all of the most critically ill patients in the 12 days since they had their first coronavirus case have experienced steady declines rather than a sudden crash. That allowed medical staff to talk with families about the risk to workers and how having to put on protective gear delays a response and decreases the chance of saving someone’s life.
It’s amazing that nurses and doctors code other infectious patients, having to gown, glove and mask up, but COVID-19 patients are different. It doesn’t take that long to don PPE items to participate in a code. I’ve seen medical professionals donning PPE on the way to the room. Coding a tuberculosis patient puts medical professionals at risk but they do it. So, why the change in policy now? And it’s interesting that no official from some hospital organizations will comment.
“The code process is one that puts them at an enhanced risk”. That is true, but so does caring for patients who have highly contagious diseases. Putting an IV into a patient that is HIV positive or has AIDS puts nurses and doctors at “enhanced risk”. Should they be denied treatments because of the “risk”? Did professors not explain in school that nurses and doctors care for patients that put them at “enhanced risk” of contracting an infectious disease? If those in the profession have gotten that weak and scared, they need to find another profession.
Please be sure and read the rest. It doesn’t get any better. Friends, if you don’t stand up now, be prepared to have these “policies” to remain in effect once this “crisis” passes. And, when it is recommended for one of your family members, don’t complain if you didn’t stand up against this atrocity. But, make sure you let your family member know you are willing to let them die based on a shortage of supplies and hospital staff fear and the “better good” of society. They deserve the truth.