Published
I just read this article and thought it was great, what do you think?
:wakeneo:I don't think she's all that smart. Actually, I think she's rather dense. Her wishes WILL NOT be followed in a health care facility, I don't care what she has tattooed on her chest, unless she has advanced directives. She was a nurse for 30 years and doesn't understand this??? She "doesn't believe in lawyers too much" but she thinks that a tattoo will suffice as a legal and binding DNR if her family can't find her living will??
Sorry, it doesn't work that way. It would seem that anyone who had been a nurse for an hour and a half would understand that.
There are much more intelligent, effective, and legally-binding ways of making her wishes known. This basically amounts to a silly idea that will do little for her.
If you read further down in the article it says that she already has the advance directives and has informed her family of her wishes. But if it ever had to go to court as in the Shiavo case, it would leave no doubt as to HER intentions!
I have said for years that although I have a MPOA and a living will, I plan on doing this. I have seen it many, many, many times where the patient has made it abundantly clear that they want no heroic measures and the POA abides by those wishes only to have the other fmaily memebers argue that it wasn't really Mom's wants.
I know this isn't legally binding, but it defintely leaves no room for arguement.
tvccrn
If you read further down in the article it says that she already has the advance directives and has informed her family of her wishes. But if it ever had to go to court as in the Shiavo case, it would leave no doubt as to HER intentions!
I read the ENTIRE article, thank you. It states:
If all else fails, if family members can't find her living will or can't face the responsibility of ending life-sustaining measures, she said, then doctors will know her wishes by simply reading the tiny words that are tattooed over her sternum.
IT DOES NOT WORK THAT WAY.
Nor does it work the way another poster stated: "It will definitely make the ER/paramedics think twice before starting compressions!"
If she presents to the ER or codes in the hospital, they cannot withhold rescuscitation based on a tattoo. I cannot speak to what the paramedics would do or what their regulations are but in the hospital, advanced directives are necessary. Yes, it leaves no room for argument among family members and yes it makes it clear to them what she would want, but NO it is not sufficient to make sure her wishes are carried out. In the end, if her family wanted to ignore her wishes and requested she be resuscitated and she had no advanced directives ON THE CHART, she would be resuscitated. Period.
In the end, if her family wanted to ignore her wishes and requested she be resuscitated and she had no advanced directives ON THE CHART, she would be resuscitated. Period.
And that is what's wrong with the advanced directive system. One mistake in paper work and your wishes are no longer known. BUT the tattoo would prompt the care provider to ASK for the documentation that obviously exists. I still say good for her!
VivaLasViejas, ASN, RN
22 Articles; 9,996 Posts
I once worked with a male nurse who had "DNR" tattooed in inch-high black letters right over his heart. Smart fella........wish I had enough cojones to do the same thing, but I'm scared of needles;)