Um, if someone gets “DO NOT RESUSCITATE” (and signature) tattooed on their chest in a drunken misjudgment, and doesn’t then the very next day either start tattoo removal or go in for a big “X” across the the “NOT” … I think they kind of deserve whatever happens to them.
Real wish or drunken regret? A “Do Not Resuscitate” tattoo throws doctors
Luckily, they dug up the paperwork in time to get the real answer.
238 view(s)
If the DNR tattoo was accompanied by a tattoo of dashed lines around the neck, it would be safe to regard the tattoo as a valid expression of intent.
The tattoo parlors that I've passed have clearly stated signs saying that they will not tattoo drunk people. They're probably afraid of getting sued after the fact.
I think the root question was whether a tattoo is a legal instrument sufficient to bind others.
They appeared to handle it well – take non-fatal maintenance actions while doubt exists and contact the ethics department. Given the circumstances, I think their approach was wise.
+Michael Verona I'm not sure if that was the issue. If the man had a dated signed note in his wallet that said "I Hereby Attest Do Not Resuscitate Lorem Ipsum," it probably would have been honored.
In this case, I suspect that the issue was that IT'S A TATTOO!
Different states have different rules regarding DNRs – for instance:
South Carolina officially recognizes a specifically formatted medical bracelet, a properly completed and signed state form, an unofficial document that covers the minimum requirement of the state form, or an explicit request from the injured patient to the physician at the time of treatment;
North Carolina requires one of two official forms, or the request of the patient, or the request of the patient's representative, or a doctor's order.
Florida is Florida, so I'll quote the Florida Department of Health directly (bold emphasis mine):
"A Do Not Resuscitate Order (DNRO) is a form or patient identification device developed by the Department of Health to identify people who do not wish to be resuscitated in the event of respiratory or cardiac arrest. A copy of the form can be obtained by downloading the form from this site (on yellow paper only)."
"Do Not Resuscitate Order—Form 1896 (Multilingual)"
"Important! In order to be legally valid this form MUST be printed on yellow paper prior to being completed. EMS and medical personnel are only required to honor the form if it is printed on yellow paper."
That's got to complicate the execution of any DNR, and probably reflects on the tattoo issue, too.
No, I'm well aware that different states have different standards, some of them more deliberate / onerous than others (having gone through this in discussion with family members in California). And I certainly understand both the legal concerns of the medical personnel involved and their ethical concerns as well.
If this was a brand-new, fresh tattoo, that would be one thing. If it's had a chance to heal up, I'd take it as the patient's desire, clearly expressed and placed in such a fashion as to be unlikely to be missed, misplaced, stolen, lost in an accident, etc.
If that's a matter of blaming state legislators than doctors, I'm fine with that, too.