Suppose you have an advance directive declining life-sustaining treatment under certain conditions. And suppose that you also elected to be an organ donor. These are common choices. But these two goals might conflict. In order to be a successful organ donor, clinicians may need to administer the very same treatment that you refused.
OPOs generally determine that such conflicts must be resolved to facilitate donation. This was recently manifested in the case of Jon Smith in Canton, Ohio.
"He has severe brain damage, Meredith recalled them telling her. He will not be able to function without machines. To breathe. To eat. To exist. A vegetative state, Meredith said. No way would Jon want that, she said to herself." But "Lifebanc told her the timing of that decision was not hers to make. Your husband is in a legally binding contract with us."
As the majority of deceased donation in the United States is now switching from donation after brain death to donation after circulatory death, such conflicts will be more common.
Took me awhile to figure out that you weren't talking about Donald Trump managing to somehow mess up Advance Directives.
ReplyDelete