Question

In September 2007, 26-year-old Kerrie Wooltorton ingested a lethal dose of antifreeze. Although her intent was to commit suicide, she called an ambulance and was rushed to the hospital. In the previous 12-month period, Wooltorton had attempted suicide several times by ingesting antifreeze but still accepted lifesaving treatment. Wooltorton had a history of self-harm, depression, and an untreatable personality disorder. However, on this occasion, she declined all treatment. Furthermore, on admission at the hospital, Wooltorton provided an advance directive when she was still conscious. Her physician requested a second opinion and legal advice but ultimately felt obligated to comply with Wooltorton's wishes. Wooltorton did not receive any treatment, except for comfort care, and died the following day

Should her physicians have followed her advance directive or provided lifesaving treatment because she accepted it the previous times she attempted suicide?

What would be the legal repercussions if her physician acted against her wishes and provided lifesaving treatment?

Answer 1

As the patient has provided an Advance Directive in regards to the medical help she needed forms a legal document for the healthcare team to make decision. This could be ethically confusing but the healthcare physician are in a state to follow as per the wish of the patient given in the directive but a patient who has personality disorder and has committed suicide out if it cannot be considered for advance directives and needs a life saving treatment as per the principle of beneficence.

Acting against the patient wish is considered to be concerning because the patient can sue the physician for not following the principle of autonomy later.