Integrated Medical Education Resources: B.) WORKSHOP DISCUSSION CASES

GROUP #6 (CASES ON LIFE SUPPORT IN TERMINAL ILLNESS)

Case #22: A patient with brain stem death is kept on artificial life support at the insistence of the family because announcing the death immediately will have an adverse effect on the values of the family business on the stock exchange.

Case #23: The family took an unconscious man to hospital reluctantly because they believed he was dead. He was admitted to the ICU and was put on artificial life support. For a period of 4 weeks the family insisted on withdrawal of life support because they would be ruined financially by the high ICU costs. The physicians refused withdrawal of life support because his brain stem was functional. The patient woke up in the 5^th week.

Case #24: A patient is brought to the emergency room after a car accident. The examining doctor found some signs of life but refused to institute life support because he was convinced it was futile. The patient died a few minutes later. The accompanying family members were furious and accused the doctor of negligence. They threatened to sue. The doctor advised them to wait for results of the postmortem examination that would show that death was inevitable. They refused to have any postmortem because it was against their religious beliefs.

Case #25: A patient admitted to the ICU after a car accident was confirmed by 3 specialist surgeons to be in a persistent vegetative state. The doctors wanted to discontinue life support but the family refused because there were signs of life like reflex flexion of joints and blinking of the eyes. The hospital decided to seek a court injunction after keeping the patient in the ICU for 6 months without any obvious improvement.