Toolbox
- size +

Who should MDs let die in a pandemic? Report offers answers

By LINDSEY TANNER, AP Medical Writer
(AP) -- Doctors know some patients needing lifesaving care won't get it in a flu pandemic or other disaster. The gut-wrenching dilemma will be deciding who to let die.
Now, an influential group of physicians has drafted a grimly specific list of recommendations for which patients wouldn't be treated. They include the very elderly, seriously hurt trauma victims, severely burned patients and those with severe dementia.

The suggested list was compiled by a task force whose members come from prestigious universities, medical groups, the military and government agencies. They include the Department of Homeland Security, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the Department of Health and Human Services.

The proposed guidelines are designed to be a blueprint for hospitals "so that everybody will be thinking in the same way" when pandemic flu or another widespread health care disaster hits, said Dr. Asha Devereaux. She is a critical care specialist in San Diego and lead writer of the task force report.

The idea is to try to make sure that scarce resources - including ventilators, medicine and doctors and nurses - are used in a uniform, objective way, task force members said.

Their recommendations appear in a report appearing Monday in the May edition of Chest, the medical journal of the American College of Chest Physicians.

"If a mass casualty critical care event were to occur tomorrow, many people with clinical conditions that are survivable under usual health care system conditions may have to forgo life-sustaining interventions owing to deficiencies in supply or staffing," the report states.

To prepare, hospitals should designate a triage team with the Godlike task of deciding who will and who won't get lifesaving care, the task force wrote. Those out of luck are the people at high risk of death and a slim chance of long-term survival. But the recommendations get much more specific, and include:

-People older than 85.

-Those with severe trauma, which could include critical injuries from car crashes and shootings.

-Severely burned patients older than 60.

-Those with severe mental impairment, which could include advanced Alzheimer's disease.

-Those with a severe chronic disease, such as advanced heart failure, lung disease or poorly controlled diabetes.

Dr. Kevin Yeskey, director of the preparedness and emergency operations office at the Department of Health and Human Services, was on the task force. He said the report would be among many the agency reviews as part of preparedness efforts.

Public health law expert Lawrence Gostin of Georgetown University called the report an important initiative but also "a political minefield and a legal minefield."

The recommendations would probably violate federal laws against age discrimination and disability discrimination, said Gostin, who was not on the task force.

If followed to a tee, such rules could exclude care for the poorest, most disadvantaged citizens who suffer disproportionately from chronic disease and disability, he said. While health care rationing will be necessary in a mass disaster, "there are some real ethical concerns here."

James Bentley, a senior vice president at American Hospital Association, said the report will give guidance to hospitals in shaping their own preparedness plans even if they don't follow all the suggestions.

He said the proposals resemble a battlefield approach in which limited health care resources are reserved for those most likely to survive.

Bentley said it's not the first time this type of approach has been recommended for a catastrophic pandemic, but that "this is the most detailed one I have seen from a professional group."

While the notion of rationing health care is unpleasant, the report could help the public understand that it will be necessary, Bentley said.

Devereaux said compiling the list "was emotionally difficult for everyone."

That's partly because members believe it's just a matter of time before such a health care disaster hits, she said.

"You never know," Devereaux said. "SARS took a lot of folks by surprise. We didn't even know it existed."

---

On the Net:

CHEST: http://www.chestjournal.org

U.S. Govt.: http://www.pandemicflu.gov

© 2008 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
» Next Article in Medicine & Health - Diseases: 24 Chinese children die of virus; other countries affected

would you recommend this story?

 

User Rating

4.6 out of 5 after 57 total votes
  • not at all
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • highly

Leave a Comment or

Rank filter

Move the slider to adjust rank threshold, so that you can hide some of the comments.
Posted by DGBEACH 05/05/08 08:13
Rank: 3.5/5 after 2 votes
One thing's for sure; the lawyers will have a field day after one of these unforeseen disasters, and will have the nicest houses afterwards!
Posted by Arthur_Dent 05/05/08 11:33
Rank: 3/5 after 1 vote
What about high-cost mental-patients?

Another question, if these humans are to be left without treatment, are they to be given pain-killers?

Or if not, are they to be permitted to die quickly, in *relative* freedom from suffering?
( that might require providing them with suicide pills, though they would obviously have to take the pills themselves, to make certain that the professionals weren't "killing" anyone )

Or are they simply to be stacked somewhere until they expire?

That /would/ cost the least, wouldn't it?

( no this isn't facetious: consider what has happened in the past, throughout this world's wars, particularly in ethnic-wars, and these sorts of questions must be asked, or they get answered in the maximal-suffering way, by default )
Posted by ChuckSmith 05/05/08 16:01
Rank: 3/5 after 4 votes
This is where Universal Health Care goes in the end- if you don't meet certain criteria, you die. Tis policy is already in effect in Durham, NC. The EMS/ambulance crews have instructions from the hospital that if you are not within defined limits, they either do not transport, do not revive, do not providecare, or go slow with no lights. I found this out when I recertified on CPR.
Posted by mrlewish 05/05/08 16:10
Rank: 3/5 after 2 votes
ChuckSmith stated "Universal Health Care goes in the end"
You've got to be kidding. This is where those without health insurance and insufficient health insurance are now.
Posted by Glis 05/05/08 18:47
Rank: 4.5/5 after 2 votes
This title is misleading. It's not like they are going to say FU in a pandemic and NEVER help you, this is a way to prioritize patients, which makes sense when you've got millions needing care and hundreds able to provide. Naturally fellow doctors are at the top of the list, then able bodied/minded citizens, etc. You prioritize based on level of possible contribution. I would wager a diseased doctor would get care over a healthy 18yr old male if said doctor has a reasonable chance of recovering and helping in the crisis. The reason it's horrible to think about is because you are placing one person as 'move valuable' than another, but that potential value is crucial in situations like these.
Posted by gromit 05/05/08 23:31
Rank: 3.17/5 after 6 votes
#1:ChuckSmith is not thinking with a fully functional brain, and will therefore be left to perish in the event of a pandemic.
#2:CPR certification (or re-certification) is not a survey course in triage nor could one consider themselves well versed in the shortcomings of a single-payer system after attending a 4 hour Red Cross class. Sorry.
#3:I can assure you that should such a disaster occur, those who need to will be VERY capable of determining who qualifies to receive care, and who should be de-prioritized for care allotment. While it is hard to imagine for most people in the U.S., this is something that occurs every day on a much smaller scale in the form of allocating OR time, ER beds, ventilators, etc. In other words, Physicians are 'practicing' for just such an event every day.
#4: This 'rationing' planning is needed due in large part to a paring down of vital resources and equipment by PRIVATE COMPANIES in order to streamline healthcare delivery. One cannot argue that we have a greater 'surge capacity' as a result of managed care. Trust me, whether our healthcare system is private or government run, in a pandemic, there will NEVER be enough 'stuff' for everyone, but given our current system, we are all gravely underequiped.
Posted by paanta 05/07/08 09:34
Rank: 3.33/5 after 3 votes
Just to build on what Gromit said:

Triaging patients has been a key strategy in allocating limited resources since WWI. There's nothing at all shocking here.

At our major public research hospital/medical center (the largest in our region) for the hundred thousand people in the immediate area and the millions within an hour long drive from here, do you know how many beds we have? Well under a thousand. Do you know how many are ALREADY in use at any given time? 85% or more.

Each of those beds costs $1M to $2M to construct. Running a well equipped facility at 50% occupancy isn't an option for _any_ hospital, public or private, in any country, regardless of whether it's a single payer system or not.

This rationing would (will) be needed in any country, in any hospital. Yes, we've got surge capacity in an emergency, but it's simply impossible to equip yourself to treat everyone in a pandemic where >10% of the population needs to be in a million dollar hospital room.

Calling this a failure of the single-payer system is beyond ridiculous.
Posted by Fart49 05/07/08 10:25
Rank: 3.67/5 after 3 votes
I recently attended a Emergency Management meeting sponsored by FEMA. Essentially, we were told that incarcerated persons, handicapped (menatlly challenged) and minorities are to receive priority care under FEMA guidelines in the aftermath of a serious emergency such as H5N1 pandemic, nuclear terrorism or other disaster. The reason is that these categories of persons are the most MEDIA SENSITIVE. What I learned is that our government bureaucrats are scared stiff that if they failed to treat prisoners, retarded persons and minorities, especially black people, their jobs will evaporate as a result of being piloried in the media. Consequently, if a minority and a white victim with identical injuries are encountered, the minority gets treated first. You don't believe me? I found it incredible too, yet that's what was telegraphed by our government officials.
Posted by TMA 05/08/08 07:50
Rank: 1/5 after 2 votes
Revised list: 1. Felons currently serving time. 2. Felons who served time.
Posted by DeeSmith 05/08/08 22:10
Not rated yet.
Gromit has it rightly; the healthcare system will be so overwhelmed, hospitals and clinics will shut their doors and they will be guarded by police.

It won't matter what your ailment, you won't be treated past a certain stage of critical care demand (easily surpassed in a bad seasonal 'flu year).

Don't sweat the concept of treating incarcerated patients; you get a virus with the case fatality rate like SARS or H5N1, in crowded quarters with various viral diseases and a decided lack of vitamin D - trust me, it won't be an issue.

Posted by Mercury_01 05/12/08 15:39
Not rated yet.
I think the lesson here is that if something major were to happen, dont get hurt. Just covertly make your way to the canadian wilderness and trust that the mouth- breathers, wall martians, rich yuppies, assholes, chronically poor, and the like will be sufficiently weeded out one way or another.
Posted by Fart49 05/14/08 15:14
Not rated yet.
Actually, theree are FEMA policies that authorize euthenasia for older victims as well as other persons, other then "media sensitive" victims of terrorism, nuclear war etc. Agree that the issue of incarcerated persons, etc is moot in a pandemic as the close proximity of such persons will exacerbate to exppsure promblem for both inmates and guard staff. However, FEMA will prioritize assets for such persons and will in most cases treat the minority over the white in cases of injury, wounds etc. They are loath to the possiblility of media labeling them "racist," to the detriment of everyone else. Look at FEMA triage guidelines if you doubt this. FEMA is at core, a liberal organization and this was apparent at the number of regional meetings I've attended since 9/11.
Posted by xen_uno 23 hours ago
Not rated yet.
I think politicians & lawyers should top the article's list. With a pandemic of truly global scale, they won't be needed ... or missed.