Mark Hilberman and his team discussed that the principle of nonmaleficence disallowed resuscitation if it produces a greater harm for the patient, thus issuing DNR order is acceptable to (or “intending to”) avoid patient suffering even worse (Hilberman et al., 1997). Similarly, if the physician believes that CPR is likely ineffective and only gives a minimal benefit to the patient, CPR may be considered as a futile treatment (Layon, 1994). Therefore, DNR is the best option for the patient in that particular condition (Braddock & Derbenwick, 2014; Edwards et al., 2003). In most cases, a patient who is assigned with DNR notice is usually the person who has a terminal illness, poor prognosis, or in the process of dying, where the condition is
…show more content…
The result indicated the patient who obtained score higher than five (referring to the score for poor prognoses such as metastatic cancer, sepsis, and dependent functional status) is likely made a preferable for a physician to issue the DNR. Also, from the weight between benefit and harm of issuing the DNR in terms of resource allocation, at least two study shows that it can bring significant reduction in resource used, particularly when the DNR order is issued early in the hospital stay (Bion, 1995; Rapoport, Teres, & Lemeshow, 1996). For instance, admission to intensive care unit should be offered only to the patient who will likely benefit from it. This evidence suggests that the seriousness of the condition of a patient can be a basis for the DNR …show more content…
The former, allowing death to take place in the natural process which also provide the patient with dignity (Venneman et al., 2008), while the latter enables death to happen in force with the intent to die faster (Beauchamp & Davidson, 1979; Vilela & Caramelli, 2009) such as withholding patient’s ventilation and nutrition support to stop their breathing and let them die of starvation. Indirectly, this definition already gives an open cut between the DNR and euthanasia. Surely, the healthcare providers are responsible to continue providing the basic care to the DNR patients, including oxygen therapy, and nutrition, consistent with their goal of care (Downar et al., 2011; Lippert, Raffay, Georgiou, Steen, & Bossaert, 2010). Even though both parts have a similar end, which is death, but death with euthanasia may experience a greater suffering. Even though some might suggest ending life with euthanasia is painless (Abdurezak Abdulahi Hashi, 2015; Beauchamp & Davidson, 1979), it still can be debated. Nevertheless, the fact that need to be highlighted is the DNR order should not be associated with euthanasia in the first place unless the DNR order is misused or abused. Understandably, this act of abusing patient is immoral since the responsibility of health care provider is to care for them until the last breath, as easily as to alleviate suffering and offer
The result indicated the patient who obtained score higher than five (referring to the score for poor prognoses such as metastatic cancer, sepsis, and dependent functional status) is likely made a preferable for a physician to issue the DNR. Also, from the weight between benefit and harm of issuing the DNR in terms of resource allocation, at least two study shows that it can bring significant reduction in resource used, particularly when the DNR order is issued early in the hospital stay (Bion, 1995; Rapoport, Teres, & Lemeshow, 1996). For instance, admission to intensive care unit should be offered only to the patient who will likely benefit from it. This evidence suggests that the seriousness of the condition of a patient can be a basis for the DNR …show more content…
The former, allowing death to take place in the natural process which also provide the patient with dignity (Venneman et al., 2008), while the latter enables death to happen in force with the intent to die faster (Beauchamp & Davidson, 1979; Vilela & Caramelli, 2009) such as withholding patient’s ventilation and nutrition support to stop their breathing and let them die of starvation. Indirectly, this definition already gives an open cut between the DNR and euthanasia. Surely, the healthcare providers are responsible to continue providing the basic care to the DNR patients, including oxygen therapy, and nutrition, consistent with their goal of care (Downar et al., 2011; Lippert, Raffay, Georgiou, Steen, & Bossaert, 2010). Even though both parts have a similar end, which is death, but death with euthanasia may experience a greater suffering. Even though some might suggest ending life with euthanasia is painless (Abdurezak Abdulahi Hashi, 2015; Beauchamp & Davidson, 1979), it still can be debated. Nevertheless, the fact that need to be highlighted is the DNR order should not be associated with euthanasia in the first place unless the DNR order is misused or abused. Understandably, this act of abusing patient is immoral since the responsibility of health care provider is to care for them until the last breath, as easily as to alleviate suffering and offer