Ethics Roundtable: Advance Directives, Autonomy, and Gastrostomy Placement.

CL is a 94-year-old male who is brought to the Emergency Department from an assisted living facility due to a new onset of weakness and altered mental status. He was in his usual state of moderately compensated health, requiring assistance for most activities of daily living due to medical frailty and a previous right brain CVA with residual mild left sided weakness. On the day of admission, the staff found him lethargic and disoriented. The family requested a surgical consult for percutaneous, endoscopic, gastrostomy (PEG) tube placement. A review of the patient's records showed that the patient had refused a PEG tube during his last two hospitalizations. During the last admission, the hospitalist documented that the patient repeatedly refused nutritional support stating "if it's my time, I've lived a full life. I'm ready to die and join my wife." There was no advance care plan ("living will"), but CL did sign a "Selection of Surrogate Decision-maker" form previously, assigning his nephew as primary surrogate. Under pressure from multiple family members, including the designated surrogate, the attending requested a surgical consultation. The surgical team determined that the patient did not have capacity and scheduled CL for PEG tube placement. The care team had concerns regarding the conflict between the patient's previously (and consistently) stated desires and the family's wishes; an ethics consult was requested.

Death or Damnation: Surrogacy and Religious Beliefs.

MC is a 42-year-old female who was in a motor vehicle accident and suffered multiple contusions as well as a fracture of the left femur, pelvic ramus, and left orbit. Due to contusion of the brain, MC has been comatose for over a week and is on mechanical ventilation to protect her airway. There is no written declaration of surrogacy. During the admission, surgery to repair the left femoral fracture was performed and was complicated by severe blood loss. Currently, MC's hematocrit is 24% with a hemoglobin of 7.4. The trauma team asserts that a blood transfusion would be in MC's best interests. Since MC lacks capacity for decision making, she cannot consent to blood transfusion. Her parents are Jehovah's Witnesses and refuse to approve blood transfusion, stating that it is against their faith. MC's brother, however, states that MC is not a practicing Jehovah's Witness and wants the medical team to provide the blood transfusion. The parents insist that decision making is their right; MC's brother feels he should be making decisions. The trauma teams calls for an emergency consultation with the hospital ethics committee.