User:Advance Care Directives

Topic: Advance Care Directives

A summary of the case problem and the questions posed

Mr. Najiri is a Shiite Muslim and Arabian-American who was placed on a ventilator for life support for minimal brain activity following a massive heart attack. No oral or written advance care directives exist. The physician speaks with the family about withdrawing the life support when Mr. Nijiri's brain dies. For Shiite Muslims death means cessation of cardiac function rather than cessation of neurological function. At the point where Mr. Nijiri's condition worsens and he is officially brain dead, the physician states that because Mr. Nijiri is dead, the hospital will no longer continue to support his cardiac functions artificially. The family reminds the physician that brain death is not really death and the physician responds: "Fine, but here in the United States brain death is death,  End of story."

Questions:

1. May a physician invoke medical futility to justify discontinuation of artificial means of life support?

2. If medical futility is not a sufficient guide for end-of-life decision-making, what alternative concept or value should guide the decision-making process?

3. Is the physician in this case guilty of cultural imperialism? Why should brain death count as true death?

A section of research including the answers to the questions posed in the case problem

1. May a physician invoke medical futility to justify discontinuation of artificial means of life support?

2. If medical futility is not a sufficient guide for end-of-life decision-making, what alternative concept or value should guide the decision-making process?

3. Is the physician in this case guilty of cultural imperialism? Why should brain death count as true death?

'''A section that generalizes the specific case to a bigger context. What meaning does your case have for the health care industry and our society at large? '''

A conclusion

A bibliography listing all cited sources, including your text, in APA.