Re: Insurance covering DNR

[Guest guest]

<<<sinpity sinp>>>

>It may be for pain control, electrolyte imbalance, wound care,

>sepsis. Just because a patient signs a DNR does not negate any of the

>rights of the patient. I won't venture to second guess your physicians but

>it seems as if an inservice is being done to the patient. DNR patients

>should not be treated as a " leper " but receive the medical and nursing >care

to make both the living and dying a humane,dignified process and >that

includes honoring their request for DNR status.

Don't get me wrong they get the care they need... but they way the orders are

being written are convuluted. Instead of writing a no-code order (cat

III)(which actually includes comfort care and basic nursing care) I see

patients with limited code orders (cat II) written in such a way to

essentially be no code patients. The explination for this that I was given

was that insurance won't cover the patients who have no-code orders (cat III)

writen but will cover limited code (catt II) patients no matter how they are

restricted.

It seems to just be a semantics thing (and there certianly are some antics

going on)...

just an observation.

:-{)>

Jt

john emt-p

austin

______________________________________________________________________

[Guest guest]

I can assure you that in the process of developing this proces with all the

focus groups and special interest groups that were involved this issue was

never even remotely suggested. I believe your docs may be a bit off base...may

want to do some additional research.

The previous writer was correct. The LAW specifically states that pallative

care will not be withheld and that would then, if what you are saying is

correct, make the insurance companies in violation of the law and subject to

investigation, and whatever else might follow.

Rinard

______________________________________________________________________