Why did the nurse refuse to do CPR? The independent retirement facility apparently has a policy that does not permit its staff members to provide medical care. Officials at Glenwood Gardens was, at first, defending its employee, who was later identified by a corporate official as a nurse, but that she was hired as the facility's Resident Services Director. Glenwood Gardens had originally stated that the nurse followed the procedures that she had been instructed to do. But on Tuesday, March 5th, 2013, Brookdale Senior Living, which owns Glenwood Gardens, issued a new statement saying the employee had "misinterpreted the company's guidelines and was on voluntary leave while the case is investigated." It sure sounds as if the lawyers have gotten involved.
Back on February 26th, dispatcher Tracey Halvorson continued to urge the nurse to start CPR, but all throughout the 7-minute and 16-second phone call, the nurse responded with negative replies. The heroic and courageous Halvorson made every effort to persuade the nurse to help the dying woman. "I understand if your boss is telling you, you can't do it," the dispatcher said, "but, as a human being...you know. Is there anybody that's willing to help this lady and not let her die?" Halvorson asked." "Not at this time," the nurse answered. Dispatcher Halvorson continued..."Is there a gardener? Any staff...anyone who doesn't work for you? Anywhere? Can we flag someone down in the street and get them to help this lady? Can we flag a stranger down? I bet a stranger would help her."
When the nurse remained unable or unwilling to cooperate - for whatever the reasons - 911 dispatcher Halvorson told the nurse, "Okay, I'll walk you through it all. We...EMS...take the liability for this. I'm happy to help you. This is EMS protocol." But still...the nurse would not comply.
An ambulance arrived several minutes later and rushed Lorraine Bayless to Mercy Southwest Hospital, where she was pronounced dead. A statement was released by the Glenwood Gardens retirement home, which indicated that a "thorough internal review of the matter" would be conducted.
Much more than a "thorough internal review" needs to be done. Someone died because of a stupid, stupid policy. People just can't let other people die when there is even the slightest possibility of saving a person's life. Unless a patient has expressly written that no measures be taken, what gives anyone the right to just let them die? Reportedly, there was no "Do Not Resuscitate" (DNR) order; and therefore...everything possible should have been done to help Lorraine Bayless to live.
There are those of you who may be thinking - because I have read such comments in other published reports - that performing CPR on a fragile, elderly individual is too dangerous and could bring more harm or perhaps kill the person. According to at least one paramedic, who has performed CPR hundreds of times - and mostly...according to his published statement...on people over the age of 60 - only one person's rib - in the paramedic's entire career - had been broken as a result of CPR...and actually...doctors believed the patient's bone was fractured during the automobile accident that injured her and not because of CPR. All that being said...there is always a risk of temporary bone damage. But death...well, that's permanent.
When a person is injured...and needs help - at least someone in the United States of America - a citizen is not obligated by Good Samaritan Laws to do first aid in most states, unless it's part of a job description. Legally, a "good samaritan" refers to someone who provides emergency aid on a voluntary basis and...according to most Good Samaritan Laws...the individual giving the aid owes the injured or ill person a duty of being reasonably careful. Laws also state that where an unconscious victim cannot respond, a good samaritan can help on the grounds of "implied consent."
In the case at Glenwood Gardens, the 911 dispatcher - on a recorded line - clearly stated that she and her organization would take full responsibility if the retirement home nurse would perform CPR. Not only was the Glenwood Gardens employee protected by a California Good Samaritan Law, but she was being directly told by an EMS official that her assistance was critical in saving the life of the woman in need and that she would not be held responsible for any liability.
What happpened at Glenwood Gardens is wrong in so many ways. It was morally reprehensible. I am not only shocked, but appalled that another human being - especially someone employed in the health care industry and who is paid to help people - would totally disregard the outright begging from a 911 operator to start CPR and, therefore, the possibility of saving another person's life. From a human point of view, I would feel obligated to perform CPR. I don't care if I lost my job because my boss told me not to do it. This was a matter of life and death and the Glenwood Gardens nurse needed to do what the EMS dispatcher instructed her to do...as I would have done...as I'm sure others would have done. There should have been no question about it. It's a no-brainer.
Dispatcher Halvorson was willing to guide the nurse through the CPR procedure - that is, if for some reason she didn't know how to properly do what was being asked of her. Anyone can learn how to perform CPR. Children learn. Whatever assistance the nurse could have done would have been of more help than nothing at all. A life could have been saved...but instead...there's sadness...and there are tears.
Someone's mother... someone's grandmother...had no chance to survive because of the stupidity of a disgraceful policy that needs changing. I certainly hope that Glenwood Gardens...and other retirement facilities that may have similar policies...will revise their thinking...and next time a 911 dispatcher advises that CPR be performed...it will result in happiness and smiles...for a life that will be saved.
And that's The Controversy for today.
I'm Gary B. Duglin.
Please express your opinions in the comment box below. You do not have to register your name and you can remain anonymous if you prefer. The Controversy wants to know your views on the essay above and on any other commentaries written on this blog. Just click on the word "Comment" below and write your thoughts in the box that appears. Make sure please that when you finish your statement that you click on the word "Publish." Thank you.
Copyright 2013 Gary B. Duglin and TheControversy.net. All Rights Reserved.
No comments:
Post a Comment