Apologies for the recent interruption in posts. We’ve had some computer issues which are now getting resolved, but we’ll have some scheduling pressures over the next couple of weeks which will reduce the volume here in the short-term. More about that tomorrow.
Right now, I wanted to share this article which came to NDY’s attention by way of Ron Panzer (bio on this page) at Hospice Patients Alliance.
(Alert: flexible and vague use of “end of life” in article)
By all accounts, 83-year-old Sam Webster is a very sick man.
He’s so sick that a doctor who specializes in end-of-life medical issues said he had less than six months to live and belonged in a hospice where he would be kept comfortable until his last breath.
But Webster’s lawyer and a nephew say Webster is not ready to die. They say he wants to be aggressively treated for what ails him and does not want to be sent to a hospice, where, the nephew and attorney say, he would be medicated only for pain.
The medical, ethical and legal questions surrounding Webster have landed in Milwaukee County Circuit Court, where Judge John DiMotto will have to decide some delicate issues that could become more common with technological advances that can extend life longer than most people had ever imagined.
Who should have the power to make Webster’s health decisions: the government or Webster’s family?
This is a very strange article for those familiar with “end of life” issues, competence, guardianship and other issues. It raises more questions than it answers. What little we do know is not comforting – the state moving in quickly to assume the decisionmaking role for an elderly man with no notice given to his family.
First, the issues facing Sam Webster have nothing to do with “technological advances.” He’s an elderly man with some degree of dementia. Allegedly, the dementia has affected his swallowing ability, leaving him at risk for aspiration pneumonia.
According to the article, both Webster’s lawyer and Webster’s nephew say that Webster doesn’t want to go to hospice. There are three lawyers involved now – one for the nephew, one for Webster and a court-appointed guardian. The nephew and Webster’s lawyer say that Webster wants a feeding tube and to go to a VA hospital instead of hospice.
Unanswered questions
Apparently, Sam Webster lived with a friend until very recently. Did he lose all capacity to make choices about his care in that time? Were other options explored and discussed regarding nutrition? Some people who have trouble swallowing do better with ground food and thickened liquids – was this explored as an alternative between starvation and a feeding tube?
Sam Webster’s voice is disturbingly absent in this article. It would be nice to know what he thinks. It’s hard to believe that the man has had a recline so rapid that he can’t communicate anything about where he wants to go and how he wants to be treated.
Or is it that when Wisconsin moved to have him declared him incompetent, they deprived him of any right to any opinion about his life at all? That was the case here in Illinois for a terminally ill man under guardianship – at least until legal advocates fought for his right to have a voice in his life and death.
Let’s hope this judge thinks it’s important to hear what Sam Webster wants. It would be nice to think that’s a given, but if it was, then guardianship would have been a more deliberative process than it looks like it was in this case. –Stephen Drake
My mother has been forced into hospice against her wishes. she has been starved, denied fluids, diabetic medication & denied antibiotics this past week. We are looking for a way to rescue her
Please email sdrake or dcoleman @ notdeadyet.org ASAP. Without specifics, or direct contact, it’s hard to come up with help.