A Family Split Down the Middle
Mr. L, 78, had a large left MCA territory stroke with hemorrhagic conversion. On day 4 his GCS is 5 (E1 V1 M3). He is intubated, brainstem reflexes are present, and he is not brain dead. NIHSS is 32. He has no advance directive and never appointed a healthcare agent. His daughter, the eldest and the one who lives locally, insists on 'everything, including trach and PEG.' His son, who lives out of state but previously drove him to appointments, says their father told him he 'never wanted to live like this.' The intensivist has documented that meaningful recovery is very unlikely. The daughter says she will call administration and a lawyer if anyone 'gives up' on her father.
1. Who is the decision-maker here, and which ethical principles are in conflict?
Read the worked answer
Decision-maker
- There is no written directive and no appointed agent, so decision-making falls to a default surrogate under state law, which typically specifies a hierarchy among relatives.
- Two siblings at the same hierarchical level disagree. Neither automatically outranks the other. This is not a situation for the bedside nurse or the intensivist to resolve by choosing the more agreeable family member.
- The standard the surrogate must apply is substituted judgment: what would this patient have chosen, not what the family wants.
Principles in tension
- Autonomy, expressed through the son's report of the patient's own stated wishes.
- Beneficence and nonmaleficence, given the poor neurologic prognosis and the burden of trach and PEG in a patient with a GCS of 5.
- Futility: the team's judgment that aggressive escalation cannot achieve the outcome the family is asking for. Futility is a contested concept and must not be invoked unilaterally.
- Veracity: the daughter may be operating on an inaccurate understanding of prognosis; that is a communication problem before it is an ethics problem.
What must not happen: a unilateral DNR order, or a unilateral withdrawal, while the conflict is unresolved and while the patient's own wishes are genuinely uncertain.
2. What concrete steps should the bedside nurse take in the next 24 hours?
Read the worked answer
Structure it as process, not persuasion.
- Get the facts into the record. Ask the son, in specific terms, what his father said and when. Direct quotes are more useful to an ethics committee than 'he wouldn't want this.' Document who said what, when.
- Test the daughter's understanding before challenging her position. Ask her to explain, in her own words, what the intensivist said about recovery. Families often hear 'we can't be sure' as 'there is a chance.' Ask directly: 'What do you think your dad would say if he could hear this conversation?'
- Request a structured family meeting with the intensivist, social work, and ideally palliative care. One conversation with both siblings present, with a shared agenda, does more than separate hallway conversations.
- Request an ethics consultation. A disagreement at the same level of the surrogate hierarchy with no agent is exactly the trigger for ethics involvement.
- Consider a time-limited trial. If the family cannot agree, propose explicit goals and a defined review date (for example, 72 hours with a repeat neurologic exam). This gives the daughter time without committing to indefinite escalation.
- Protect the patient's comfort throughout, regardless of the code status debate. Analgesia and sedation for signs of pain or distress are never part of the dispute.
- Do not take sides out loud. If you advocate for one sibling in front of the other, you damage the therapeutic relationship and your own credibility at the ethics meeting.
3. The daughter demands full code, and the intensivist tells you he plans to write a DNR order anyway. What is your role?
Read the worked answer
You are the patient's advocate and the guardian of process, not the arbiter of the outcome.
- Do not co-sign or facilitate a unilateral DNR. Writing a DNR over a surrogate's objection, without an ethics process or the institution's formal conflict-resolution pathway, is a policy and legal exposure and violates the family's role as surrogate.
- Say so clearly and specifically to the intensivist. 'I am not comfortable with a DNR order while the surrogate objects and ethics has not reviewed this. Can we get ethics involved today?' State it as a process objection, not a personal judgment about prognosis.
- Escalate through the chain of command if the order is written anyway: charge nurse, nursing supervisor, ethics committee, risk management. This is a legitimate use of the chain, not insubordination.
- Continue to provide full care in the meantime. The patient's code status is unresolved, so he remains full code until the process resolves.
- Name your own moral distress. Repeatedly providing what you believe is non-beneficial treatment, or being asked to act against a family's stated wishes, is a recognized source of moral distress with real consequences. Use debriefing, the ethics committee, or employee assistance. Notice it early; nurses who ignore it tend to either withdraw from the family or over-advocate, and both harm the patient.
- Document objectively: the disagreement, who was notified, and the plan and timeline. That record protects the patient and you.