Mitchell Berger volunteered to write a review of William Colby’s, Unplugged: Reclaiming Our Right To Die in America (2006, American Management Association, 272 pp., $24.95 hardcover), and an excellent review it is too:
High-profile legal cases such as those involving Karen Ann Quinlan, Nancy Cruzan and Terri Schiavo and their families coupled with improvements in medical technology have forced growing numbers of patients and their family members, health care providers, judges, lawyers and legislators to confront difficult end-of-life dilemmas. Because of his own background as an attorney for the Cruzan family for four years, supporter of the hospice movement and contributor to the 1990 Patient Self-Determination Act, which requires hospitals to inform patients in writing about health care advance directives such as living wills, attorney William Colby, author of Unplugged: Reclaiming Our Right to Die in America, brings unique insights to his discussion of these cases, evolving medical technology and the overarching issue of end-of-life care in America.
Colby’s book includes an extensive discussion of the Quinlan, Cruzan and Schiavo cases. He describes how relatively recent advances in scientific knowledge, such as an improved understanding of brain function, brain death and vegetative states and advances such as cardiac defibrillators, artificial respirators, feeding tubes, percutaneous endocscopic gastronomy (PEG) tubes (a method of providing nourishment to patients using a tube inserted through an endoscopic procedure which is simpler than standard feeding tube insertion), have led to new challenges as society struggles to reconcile the benefits of these technologies with respect for the individual’s quality of life and right to live and die in a manner reflecting their beliefs. Colby devotes an entire chapter of his book to explaining the ethical and medical issues associated with feeding tubes and PEG; he explains how PEG tubes, originally intended for pediatric patients, are now used routinely in cognitively impaired elderly persons who can no longer eat on their own.
While many people would want every reasonable measure taken to prolong and maintain their life regardless of their condition, many others would not want to live in a state where they are no longer able to respond to their loved ones and the world around them. When Nancy Cruzan, then a 25-year old Missouri woman, was left in a persistent vegetative state following a car wreck in 1983, her father authorized insertion of a feeding tube. Colby explains that in a persistent vegetative state a patient may be awake and even smile or move their eyes, however these movements are completely involuntary and in fact the patient has “no thinking, no feeling, no consciousness” (p. 10). When it became clear as first months and then years went by that Nancy Cruzan would never recover from her condition, Cruzan’s family tried to act on their shared “belief that [she] would want the feeding tube removed” (p. 89). After many years of legal proceedings both in Missouri and at the federal level, including a U.S. Supreme Court decision in 1990, the family eventually was granted the right to remove the feeding tube based on evidence of what Nancy Cruzan herself would have wanted. Extensive publicity surrounded this case – indeed the Cruzan family allowed PBS’ Frontline to document their experiences — and Colby describes how the Cruzan family’s experience altered public opinion about end-of-life care both in Missouri and elsewhere and encouraged Missouri Senator John Danforth and others to sponsor the Patient Self-Determination Act.
In perhaps the most interesting portion of his book (Chapters 1-3), Colby provides an informative and balanced discussion of the most recent and perhaps controversial end-of-life care case involving Terri Schiavo. Unlike Nancy Cruzan’s family, Schiavo’s relatives were bitterly divided about what she would have wanted and what was best for her. Colby discusses his own approach to death and dying issues and even includes his own health care power of attorney as an example for others (Chapter 10; Appendix). However, he also notes the limitations of laws and legal documents. For instance, Colby describes the “institutional glide path” which dictates that many hospital patients will receive “aggressive,” often unwanted end-of-life medical care; the “glide path” reflects the tendency of health care providers and institutions to treat patients in customary, technology-intensive ways due to such factors as medical education, institutional culture and fear of litigation.
To help ensure that the end-of-life care we receive reflects our values and desires, Colby emphasizes the importance of talking at length with family members, friends and health care providers about how we would want to be cared for if our capacity to make our own decisions should ever be impaired by illness or injury. This dialogue will help ensure that our family members and health providers are not forced to confront complex dilemmas in tense and emotional circumstances with their loved one’s wishes unclear.
Colby is a strong supporter of hospice as one option for end-of-life care. Indeed, he serves as a Senior Fellow of the National Hospice and Palliative Care Organization in Washington, D.C., and the foreword to his book is contributed by that organization’s chief executive officer. He explains the rise of hospice care, which he characterizes as a “hidden jewel,” and notes that growing numbers of patients are opting for hospice (750000 of 2.5 million Americans who died in 2005). Hospice emphasizes communication between patients, families and health care providers, symptom relief and palliative care (Chapter 15).
Though he clearly has strong opinions, Colby’s book is fair and even-handed in his treatment of the major legal and ethical issues and he includes chapters devoted to concerns about expanded recognition of the “right to die” expressed by religious organizations and persons with disabilities. The book is well-researched and well-documented, with numerous end notes, citations to outside sources, suggestions for further reading and contact information for such relevant organizations as the National Family Caregivers Association and National Institute on Aging. Overall, Colby’s book provides readers with excellent background about the key legal and scientific issues, good ideas for how to approach end-of-life care and strong motivation for initiating these sometimes awkward but critically important conversations with family members and health care providers.
(or, according to the IV, much worse than that). Much of this stems from the basic idea that fracture care, or broken bone treatment, seems very straight-forward. Oh, but wait…
figured out that the way to save the $2 trillion healthcare industry – it’s for people to not get sick by getting doctors out of medicine. After spending the last few years following doctors and radiologists around, visiting cancer centers and spending time watching mice get poked and prodded, I’ve realized it is time to embed the expertise of doctors in silicon and software. Why have radiologists read mammograms to find 1 in 200 that have breast cancer? Today, a third of mammograms now have their second read done by computer, computer aided detection from companies like R2 and iCad, and for $29, much less than a radiologist, and perhaps more accurate. For me, that’s just a start. But I was astounded to learn that CT scans are on the same learning curve as PCs and iPods and cell phones. One slice per rotation moved to 4 slice, 16 slice, 64 slice and soon 256 slice CT scanners. Instead of film, the output is a high res color 3D model. Beats a blood pressure reading and cholesterol number, which is all that physicians can manage. They are flying blind.So I started running the numbers. State of the art scans are still close to $1000. Say 1% of adults have heart attacks every year. A stent procedure runs about $15,000 just for the stent, with the hospital stay and bandaids, you are in for closer to $20-30,000, let alone lost wages and productivity. Heart scans today are around $1000. So if you screen 100 people, it costs $100,000, certainly more than treating the 1 in 100 heart attack patient. So,…, Blue Cross won’t pay for scans. It is better for them if nature does their screening for them, you or I actually having a heart attack – ding, ding, ding, we found our 1 in 100.They probably still wouldn’t pay if the scans were $500. But they might at $200. And they certainly would pay at $100, because it would be cheaper to screen than to pay for care. Because it is on the silicon learning curve (down 30% every year, 50% every two years), it is pretty easy to see $100 scans within five years, probably less. Heart attacks and stroke may become a thing of the past.And cancer, the third member of the Big Three in healthcare spending? Structural CT scans will transition to molecular imaging to find cancer early. I can see biomarkers on antibody chips that can eventually sell for $1 or maybe even 10 cents can detect unique cancer proteins in blood and flag cancer early enough for much cheaper treatment, beating symptoms by five years.Doctors can’t do that. In the end, I believe that Silicon Valley will do to doctors what ATMs did to tellers.
0.40; P values <.001) for all pairwise comparisons between
-blocker use at admission and discharge, aspirin use at admission and discharge, and angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor use, and weaker, but statistically significant, correlations between these medication measures and smoking cessation counseling and time to reperfusion therapy measures (correlation coefficients <0.40; P values <.001). Some process measures were significantly correlated with risk-standardized, 30-day mortality rates (P values <.001) but together explained only 6.0% of hospital-level variation in risk-standardized, 30-day mortality rates for patients with AMI.