Michalowski Sabine, Martin Wayne
School of Law, University of Essex, Colchester CO4 3SQ, UK.
School of Philosophy and Art History, University of Essex, Colchester CO4 3SQ, UK.
Med Law Rev. 2022 Sep 6;30(3):434-456. doi: 10.1093/medlaw/fwac007.
Do not attempt cardiopulmonary resuscitation (DNACPR) decisions are a means to consider in advance the appropriateness of CPR measures if an acute crisis arises. During the COVID-19 pandemic, problems with such decisions, for example the putting in place of DNACPR decisions for all residents of certain care homes, received a lot of attention, prompting a Care Quality Commission (CQC) report with recommendations for improvement. Building on the CQC report, our article addresses a cluster of legal uncertainties surrounding DNACPR decisions, in particular about the grounds for such decisions and the correct procedures for the legally required consultation, including with whom to consult. This article will also analyse commonly used DNACPR forms, as well as the Recommended Summary Plan for Emergency Care and Treatment (ReSPECT) form, which aims to incorporate DNACPR decisions as part of more holistic end-of-life care planning. The analysis shows that all forms exhibit shortcomings in reflecting the legal requirements for DNACPR decisions. We recommend a number of changes to the forms aimed at rendering DNACPR practice compliant with the law and more protective of the person's human rights.
不进行心肺复苏(DNACPR)的决定是一种预先考虑在急性危机出现时心肺复苏措施是否合适的方式。在新冠疫情期间,此类决定引发了诸多问题,例如为某些养老院的所有居民制定不进行心肺复苏的决定,这受到了广泛关注,促使护理质量委员会(CQC)发布了一份报告并提出改进建议。基于护理质量委员会的报告,我们的文章探讨了围绕不进行心肺复苏决定的一系列法律不确定性,特别是此类决定的依据以及法定咨询所需的正确程序,包括咨询对象。本文还将分析常用的不进行心肺复苏表格以及紧急护理和治疗推荐总结计划(ReSPECT)表格,后者旨在将不进行心肺复苏的决定纳入更全面的临终护理规划。分析表明,所有表格在反映不进行心肺复苏决定的法律要求方面都存在缺陷。我们建议对这些表格进行一些修改,以使不进行心肺复苏的做法符合法律规定并更好地保护个人人权。