EMS workers stop medical treatment after reading will in the field
SAN ANTONIO – It was a life or death situation. Paramedics respond to an emergency call on the east side. And while they initially start working on the man, they stop after reading his will.
The Read family spoke with News 4 WOAI Trouble Shooter Mireya Villarreal and says EMS crews didn’t read the will correctly and made a big mistake.
This call if full of strange. Which is why I’m scratching my head. Maybe it’s a peculiarity of Texas law, but around here a living will isn’t enough for me to stop resuscitation. Especially if the family is on scene and not on board with the decision. I have to see a Do Not Resuscitate (DNR) order and make sure that it is valid before I’ll stop resuscitation in circumstances like this. Then again, this is a news media story based on the unsubstantiated claims of the bereaved family. Which means a lot might have been left out of the story.
Chief Grenato says paramedics on scene reviewed Sam Read’s living will with a medical expert over the phone; then decided to stop treatment. The state has reviewed this case and cleared the department of any wrong doing. Still, they’ve been working with the Read family to change the way paramedic crews interact with patients and their families.
I’m going to guess that the “medical expert” was medical control, who authorized the termination of resuscitation. Again, just a guess since the article isn’t very illuminating. The bolded sentence points to the family’s complaint, it was not a matter of doing something wrong, it was a matter of not presenting it to the family in the right way.
And of course, there is no situation so screwed up that the legislature can’t screw it up more,
But that answer wasn’t enough for Terry Read. He wanted to do more. And for the last two years he’s been working with State Representative Ruth McClendon to keep this from happening to anyone else.
“EMS personnel do not have the responsibility or the training or the knowledge to interpret legal documents,” Representative McClendon told us.
She sponsored House Bill 577, which was passed during this legislative session. It makes it very clear, a first responders’ first priority is to treat a patient.
“Emergency responders, paramedics, are not in the business of interpreting living wills. They’re in the business of doing what they’re trained to do, which is to administer emergency medical treatment,” Terry Read explained.
Here is Texas House Bill 577. Does it help clarify the matter? Beats me.
Glad I don’t work there. We have a lot of lattitude here with living wills, DNR notations scribbled in the patient record, etc. It keeps us from initiating a lot of futile resuscitation attempts. We always try to err on the side of the patient, and if in doubt, we’ll start. But I am soooo glad I do not work in as rigid a system as Texas may soon be, if stuff like that gets passed.
As for Mr Read, I have to interpret legal documents all of the time. Powers of Attorney come to mind. I would suggest he actually find out what this EMS gig is all about. Might surprise him.
The law is already passed and in effect, I guess the story was sitting for a bit. Even more clueless than Mr. Reid, is the legislator who sponsored the bill. Not that clueless legislators should be a surprise.
Paramedics don’t have the training or expertise to understand legal documents … so we’re going to pass a law about it.
Bitter irony, thy name is McClendon.
Politicians are generally morons, and she continues the trend. A Democrat too. She’s a great argument for term limits.
I’m thinking the protocol was initiated by a higher up that had been tagged in the past for saving somebody that didn’t wish for any heroic measures to save their life. I can understand how it happened, but I’ve never heard of any Texas law that dictates a criminal offense if someone saves a life. The paramedics, probably ignorant of the law, should have questioned the authority.
Absent a specific law, I’m more inclined to think that it would have been a civil liability. Then again, I don’t know how much litigation there has been for “wrongful resuscitation” or whatever we’d call it.
Read Texas 166.86:
The desire of a competent person, including a competent minor, supersedes the effect of an out-of-hospital DNR order executed or issued by or on behalf of the person when the desire is communicated to responding health care professionals as provided by this subchapter.
This law can create a good bit of confusion. DNR orders are the subject of entire sections of law, and these end of life decisions are nearly as complicated as competency issues.