2). During the six months at Jack’s bedside Rebecca saw to it that he received appropriate care options. She practiced substituted judgment during her daily six months hospital visits while his parents only saw him during the first week of the accident.
I chose this case study because it reminded me of when my uncle who lost his fiancée. Her parents made the decision for her artificial nutrition and hydration to be discontinued by the end of the first day in the hospital. They did not allow any surrogate decision-making collaboration from my uncle, grandmother, and neurologist who pleaded to give their daughter more time to recover because she was pregnant, young and her brain stem was still active and could revitalizes itself. These experiences were heart-breaking. I wonder how one person can have so much power over one’s life or death without collaboration surrogate decision-making of parents and fiancée.
On the parent’s defense Nair & Collins, (2015) states the concept of brain death and surrogates remains both settled and unsettled if “there is a consistent 30% to 40% false positive …show more content…
All these factors and other case examples need to be taken into consideration for both Rebecca and Jack’s parents to have collaborative surrogate consent to act in Jack’s best interest realizing that Jack’s autonomous oral directive and best interest did not have a time line. These are examples of why the PVS diagnosis is not always true. Jack’s parents are absorbing his medical cost. In contrast, does Rebecca want to be burden with her continued physical and emotional support reminding her daily of her potential guilt as the driver? Ethically their decision needs to consider Jack’s autonomy, oral directives, and humanitarian