Facility Nurse Watches Patient Slowly Die, Refuses CPR

Originally posted by ThirdEyeofHorus
reply to post by Libertygal

 

oh ok so it was a blog.

How about AP? Is that mainstream journalistic news?

It prompted calls for legislation Monday to prevent a repeat of what happened Feb. 26 at Glenwood Gardens in Bakersfield.

The Tennessee-based parent company also
said that by law, the independent living facility is
"not licensed to provide medical care to any of
its residents."

It seems their legislation provoked the problem. Do they not even know their own laws governing these facilities?

She lived in the independent living building, which state officials said is like a senior apartment complex and doesn't operate under licensing oversight.

"This is a wakeup call," said Assemblywoman Mariko Yamada, chair of the California Assembly Aging and Long-term Care Committee. "I'm sorry it took a tragedy like this to bring it to our attention."

They do not define what "state licensing oversight" they mean. If they mean licensing to provide medical care, that's exactly right. Again, do they not know the laws governing their own facilities? It took this to wake them up?

The death shines a light on the varying medical
care that different types of elderly housing
provide — differences that consumers may not
be aware of, advocates say.

Fact and then media hype. I can wholly promise you that both the resident and the daughter knew the restrictions when they signed the contract, that no medical staff would be on site.

"We understand that the 911 tape of this event
has caused concern, but our family knows that
mom had full knowledge of the limitations of
Glenwood Gardens and is at peace," the family's
statement said.

Independent living facilities "should not have a policy that says you can stand there and watch somebody die," said Pat McGinnis, founder of California Advocates for Nursing Home Reform, a consumer advocacy group. "How a nurse can do that is beyond comprehension."

"The consensus is if they are a nurse and if they are at work as a nurse, then they should be offering the appropriate medical care," said Russ Heimerich, spokesman for the California Board of Registered Nursing, the agency that licenses health care providers.

More media hype, so and so says, yes, I get it.

Brookdale Senior Living said in a statement that
the woman on the 911 call was "serving in the
capacity of a resident services director, not a
nurse."

So are you one of those people who believes liberty means the right to die because people in modern medicine forgot the Hippocratic oath?

I am going to ignore where you start going off the rails here, and begin to attack the poster and not the subject. "Are you one of those people..." It doesn't matter who or what I am.

Lets just say she had the right to die how she wanted, unfettered from others that feel they have the right to stick their noses in everyones' family afairs because they feel something "unjust" happened.

Remove the media bruhaha, and what are you left with?

"We regret that this private and most personal
time has been escalated by the media," the
statement said.

A woman who died after a nurse at her elder
home refused to provide CPR had chosen to live
in a facility without medical staff and wanted to
pass away without life-prolonging intervention,
her family said Tuesday.

Lets not even mention the idiots in California that don't even know the laws that govern their own Independent living facilities that make themselves look like total morons in national press.

Take out all the drama, he said she said, look at the FACTS. Not the emotion.

Source

Originally posted by CALGARIAN
She was under STRICT ORDERS to not medically assist these people, they are to CALL 911 and stand by.
THAT IS IT.

She was on duty. She would have lost her job if she provided CPR. I understand a life is more important than her job BUT.. thats how it is

DONT BE MAD WITH HER, BE UPSET WITH HER EMPLOYER!

Then she must not be an actual nurse? Maybe a nurses aide? Regardless, too many people hide behind the all-mighty "policy" as an excuse for doing nothing. Give me an f'n break. Rather that save the woman's life and risk losing her job, she kept her job and can now live with the fact that she watched someone's wife, mother, grandmother die because of some policy.

I had something longer written...but ATS has a MAJOR MAJOR problem recently with "Submit" dumping whole articles. Thats 5 times in less than a week I've lost a multi-thousand char post...because the ATS Software dumped it sideways.

To save wasting the time of retyping the whole thing? I'll make it REAL SIMPLE.

You watch my family member die on the floor? You won't live out the year. Probably won't see the end of the month. It won't be an accident and it won't be a doubt. It's cause and effect. Murder my family...and you'll follow.

I hope medical folks read and consider that because MILLIONS feel as strong or more so than I do. Excuses to WATCH SOMEONE die on the floor? No..... Make the excuses to St Peter when you meet him, is my attitude.

reply to post by ThirdEyeofHorus


"So where is this no code stuff coming from?"

It could be a very simple answer. She could have had an Advance Directive, or Living Will, which is considered one in the same in non-medical facilities as a no-code.

You do not have to have an attorney to put one on file, you can file it with a hospital, or any facility you choose, or not. The only requirement is that it be witnessed by two people not related to the writer of the Advance Directive.

While she may not have had a DNR on file, she may well have had an Advance Directive on file. Even if she did not, it isn't required to live in an apartment, as long as her family is aware.

www.nlm.nih.gov...

A living will tells how you feel about care intended to sustain life. You
can accept or refuse medical care. There are many issues to
address, including

The use of dialysis and breathing machines
If you want to be resuscitated if breathing or heartbeat stops
Tube feeding
Organ or tissue donation

Originally posted by Wrabbit2000
I had something longer written...but ATS has a MAJOR MAJOR problem recently with "Submit" dumping whole articles. Thats 5 times in less than a week I've lost a multi-thousand char post...because the ATS Software dumped it sideways.

To save wasting the time of retyping the whole thing? I'll make it REAL SIMPLE.

You watch my family member die on the floor? You won't live out the year. Probably won't see the end of the month. It won't be an accident and it won't be a doubt. It's cause and effect. Murder my family...and you'll follow.

I hope medical folks read and consider that because MILLIONS feel as strong or more so than I do. Excuses to WATCH SOMEONE die on the floor? No..... Make the excuses to St Peter when you meet him, is my attitude.

Come on, more sensationalism isn't dealing with the facts. The person did not want live saving or heroic measures. The family statement has been posted multiple times.

AND, or Allow Natural Death, is NOT murder.

The FACTS are still not fully known.

We do not know the relationship between Ms. Bayless and the person making the 911 call. We do not know if she had a living will, on file or not, it doesn't matter.

What we have to go on is what the family said, that she was aware of her living situation, and wanted to die naturally.

Where are the advocates for this womans' rights to die how SHE wanted?

Why does it always have to be the way someone else deems "the right way to do things"?

She died peacefully, naturally, and in the place she wanted to be, probably among her friends. Why is this so horrible?

I will continue to stand by my words that we do not have enough information, in particular to judge anyone, but it is looking more and more like no one is advocating for Ms. Bayless' right to die an unfettered death, but more that she must die how everyone else sees fit.

People are so busy looking to judge, looking to hang someone for some perceived crime, but the real crime here is everyone is looking over a dead body and arguing about it, all the while not giving one thought to how Ms. Bayless felt, or what she may have wanted.

People should move their elderly parents in protest....their policy was a result of fear over lawsuits so hit them in the pocketbook.

Originally posted by CosmicCitizen
People should move their elderly parents in protest....their policy was a result of fear over lawsuits so hit them in the pocketbook.

Their policy is a result of California Law that prohibits the practice of medicine or medical care at an unlicensed facility, which this is.

If people move their parents, it should be because they want medical staff to attend them. Otherwise, they knew no medical staff would be there. They signed the contract, full disclosure is required by law in every state in the country.

reply to post by Libertygal

Acting as a Good Samaritan even if by a trained "Nurse" in an emergency should not be construed by the state as "practicing medicine". Obviously if they move their parents then it should be to a facility that will perform CPR if necessary - even if they cant give X rays and prescribe medicine, etc. The intent of the law was surely to save people (from idiots practicing medicine) not to let them die.

Originally posted by Gridrebel

Originally posted by NellahB
From what I've read about the patient, she was a NO CODE! You do know that means no CPR, resuscitation, etc. You'd better not go against a person's NO CODE.

THEN WHY CALL 911 EMERGENCY??????????????????????????????????????????????

Because it is required.

I work in a Spine and Brain unit. We get a LOT of stroke patients.

We get a LOT of patients from Nursing Homes, that come to us by ambulance, complete with a DNR order.

The facility is required to send a patient that is beyond the scope of their care, even IF they have a DNR.

A DNR does NOT mean do not treat. In fact, people with a DNR are treated in hospital, as aggressively as a person without one. The only difference lies in the scope of the DNR, do not resuscitate, do not intubate, no tube feeds, no iv fluids, no cardiac drugs, no intubation. DNRs are quite line item specific. Sometimes, they encompass everything.

An AND, however, does. I have discussed AND Allow Natural Death multiple times in this thread. Still, even with AND, a person will be transported to a medical facility.

It is far better to have a witnessed death, by medical professionals, than not.

If a person dies a natural death, under the care of a physician, without trauma, no autopsy is required.

This spares the family a multitude of issues, including unwanted or unecessary autopsy, delay in burial, and other things. It is a personal choice in many cases, to have an autopsy or not. Most people opt out, it is too much to bear after a drawn out illness and death of a loved one.

YMMV, depending on what state laws are, but that is the general gist of the answer to your question.

Originally posted by CosmicCitizen
reply to post by Libertygal

 

Acting as a Good Samaritan even if by a trained "Nurse" in an emergency should not be construed by the state as "practicing medicine". Obviously if they move their parents then it should be to a facility that will perform CPR if necessary - even if they cant give X rays and prescribe medicine, etc. The intent of the law was surely to save people (from idiots practicing medicine) not to let them die.

Are you aware that there are some places that do not have fire rescue, firemen, any fire help at all? Do you know that when people choose to live there, they do so knowingly? Do you know this is a personal choice? People DO still have that right, you know?

The people that CHOOSE to live in this INDEPENDENT living facility have made the free choice to do so, INFORMED there will be no rescue.

Why is this SO hard for people to understand?! They don't WANT YOUR "HELP".

If they did, they would live in another place with assurances that such help would be available.

I have had a living will since I was 45, I will turn 50 this year. Guess what? I don't want your help either!!

That is MY right, MY choice, and MY free will. I have a DNR, too, on file until 2050, just to make sure that no one rescues me from the brink of death to live in a vegetative state.

reply to post by Libertygal

The facts I need to know or care about are what I heard on the 9/11 call. I did NOT hear a competent professional expaining a DNR in place and how it was simply not permitted to give CPR under the legal circumstances. I heard a loser in a medical job hemming, hawing and generally fumbling for one excuse after another while a person died in front on them.

Now maybe this person DID have a verbal or other DNR request. Maybe the person on the phone was even aware of it, not that you'd know or anything....but that sure wasn't the reason stated or indicated for letting the patient slowly die.

HAD that been the reasoning, my attitude would be radically different. My own Dad was on a DNR and why, in the end, I made the decision to turn off the machines. Believe me, I understand the issues involved here ...I just can't reconcile all the "honorable intentions" people give this idiot on the phone to what they WISH had happened....compared to what apparently DID happen.

Someone barely able to articulate the reasons why, allowed a patient in their care to die without help, despite being TOLD to get ANYONE ..who could communicate effectively and help. That, in my mind is murder. The fact it may have been found to be something else, technically, and later? That doesn't change the mindset of the idiot on the phone who let it happen, does it?

Originally posted by CosmicCitizen
People should move their elderly parents in protest....their policy was a result of fear over lawsuits so hit them in the pocketbook.

Do it, I find it disgusting that so many old people are put into care by their familys and more or less forgotten about and I work in a care home.
Ask yourself this would you wipe your Grans bum everytime she goes to the loo? help her clean up when she has messed herself?
Believe me many many people would end up murdering their own when they see what pain some have to live with everyday.

reply to post by Wrabbit2000


You are still basing a whole set of emotional reaponse on a 7 minute and 17 second tape recording.

You are still going off very little fact, and a lot of emotion.

The person will have to answer for her decisions and actions, but until then, people are still making rash statements with very little knowledge.

7 minutes and 17 seconds. You don't have anything but a mere glimpse and a lot of hysteria into what happened.

Now maybe this person DID have a verbal or other DNR request. Maybe the person on
the phone was even aware of it, not that you'd know or anything....but that sure wasn't
the reason stated or indicated for letting the patient slowly die.

The point everyone seems to be missing is, this is an apartment building. Nothing more, nothing less. There was no REASON for her to have a DNR on file with them, any more than one needs to be filed with a landlord anywhere.

The other point people seem to be missing, she was not employed as a nurse. Period.

None of the residences living there expect to get CPR! Not ONE!


No, not that I would know... nor would you. As I have been saying, not enough information.

Et tu?

reply to post by Libertygal

That 7 minute phone call of incompetent fear and excuse giving is likely a few minutes MORE than the dying patient was able to hear or focus on during the final stages of dying.

I'll leave it to you and others to put the serious work and effort into finding reasons why those 7 minutes should matter more for the idiot who let the patient die, then the patient who died so hard and so badly. I can't get my mind off what it must have been like, for the patient (to whatever degree they were aware) to hear the end of their life bantered around with excuses like someone who just doesn't feel like running out to refill the coffee pot.

This is as bad or worse than the EMT's in New York that let the woman die on the floor there for liability reasons and because they weren't on-duty, EMT's "it wasn't their problem".

Well, failing a CLEAR DNR, which the case here doesn't suggest existed for this worker to know about, the reaction to another person dying should be to HELP ...not think up reasons why not. I'm with the dispatcher in her seeming incredulity and disbelief. How could anyone WATCH another person die hard and slow ...while babbling reason after half formed reason why helping can't be done?

Like I said.. You focus on why the loser isn't a loser. I'll focus on the hell that patient lived..while it doesn't sound like anyone will really be accountable in the end. Lets hope you and I get better than to die of literal lack of action ...while struggling like a fish on a hot summer beach.

S ource

The CPR Death at Glenwood
Gardens: What Really Happened and Five Lessons You Should Learn

By now you know the story—or at least think
you do: A nursing home nurse sees an 87-year-old resident in cardiac arrest and calls 9-11.

(Snip)

Except most of the story isn’t true. Lorraine
Bayless lived at a Bakersfield (CA) continuing
care community called Glenwood Gardens, but
in independent living, not in its skilled nursing
facility. She did not die of a heart attack but of a
stroke, according to the death certificate signed
by her personal physician.

(Snip)

And there is more. Mrs. Bayless did not want
life-prolonging medical interventions, and her
family is fully satisfied with the care she
received. And the staffer who called 9-11 may
not have been a licensed nurse at all.

(Snip)

One piece
of the story is true: Glenwood Garden staffers
are prohibited from performing CPR or other
medical interventions and are instructed to call
9-11 in the event of emergencies.

(Snip)

Independent living communities are not
nursing homes or assisted living facilities. You
should not expect them to provide medical care
or even personal assistance.

(Snip)

What emergency care do you want? This may
be the most important question of all. Mrs.
Bayless’ family says she did not want life-prolonging emergency care.

(Snip)

Finally, lesson No. 5: Don’t believe all the news
you read on the Web.

Excellent article, see the link for the full read, it's worth it.

reply to post by Wrabbit2000


I am personally not focused on the 911 call at all.

I am personally advocating for Ms. Bayless' right to die a natural death in the surroundings that she chose, with the people she chose to spend the day with that day.

She made an informed decision to live where she was. If she wanted CPR or heroic measures, she would have chosen one of the facilities just next door.

I feel her daughters' statement holds the truest words of all.

"We regret that this private and most personal time
has been escalated by the media," the statement said.

...Lorraine Bayless received adequate care at the Bakersfield,
Calif., facility, and that she had wanted to die naturally.

"It was our beloved mother and grandmother's wish to
die naturally and without any kind of life prolonging
intervention," the family said. "We understand that the
911 tape of this event has caused concern, but our
family knows that mom had full knowledge of the
limitations of Glenwood Gardens and is at peace."

The attempted insults and put downs will not change the fact that I will continue to advocate fir Ms. Bayless' right to die a natural death, unfettered from those that think she has to die a certain way.

I will continue, regardless of insults or put downs, to state there is not enough information to proclaim "MURDER" or wish death upon the people that were there.

Source

Double post...

reply to post by Lucid Lunacy

Most of your post seemed objective here so I have to ask if you're being so with this statement. Every time you do CPR on an 87 year old it will result in that person spending the rest of their life on life support?

In my experience I would say yes either that or they will die after the initial cardiac event.

reply to post by villunder

holding a patient’s hand is the priest job. Our job is CPR.

You are not a nurse, you cannot possibly claim to be a nurse as you have said in a prior post and post this.

If you are a nurse who sees holding a dying mans had as “not part of your job” then you should not be practicing.

I don’t actually believe you are a nurse I think you are claiming to be a nurse because you believe that might give your counter argument some credibility but its quite easy to spot a fake. The above comment of yours is a perfect example of how to spot such a fake.

Yes I have spent quite a bit of time in ICU and oncology (12 weeks in ICU as a student)

And recently I held sat with the rest of my family round my grandmothers death bed as she took her last breath and I didn’t start CPR.

reply to post by OtherSideOfTheCoin


The four times I have done CPR I knew they were already gone but until the ambulance got there I continued, all four times I was ordered to do it (after the initial panic) due to myself being the only person trained to do so on shift.
All four had to have an autopsy done due to me performing CPR and all four times I was told I couldn't have saved them anyway due to them dying of other things not a heart attack.
I have made sure in my home now everyone gets first aid training and that everyone knows who has a DNR and who does not, seeing the first time the lady did have a dnr but I was not told and was told to perform CPR I told her family this but they understood and forgave me.
I have to get out of this job or I will lose my mind .