We present the case of a person whose presumed code-status preference led him to tattoo "Do Not Resuscitate" on his chest. Paramedics brought an unconscious 70-year-old man with a history of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, diabetes mellitus, and atrial fibrillation to the emergency department, where he was found to have an elevated blood alcohol level. The staff of the medical intensive care unit evaluated him several hours later when hypotension and an anion-gap metabolic acidosis with a pH of 6.81 developed. His anterior chest had a tattoo that read "Do Not Resuscitate," accompanied by his presumed signature (Figure 1). Because he presented without identification or family, the social work department was called to assist in contacting next of kin. All efforts at treating reversible causes of his decreased level of consciousness failed to produce a mental status adequate for discussing goals of care.

We initially decided not to honor the tattoo, invoking the principle of not choosing an irreversible path when faced with uncertainty. This decision left us conflicted owing to the patient's extraordinary effort to make his presumed advance directive known; therefore, an ethics consultation was requested. He was placed on empirical antibiotics, received intravenous fluid resuscitation and vasopressors, and was treated with bilevel positive airway pressure.

After reviewing the patient's case, the ethics consultants advised us to honor the patient's do not resuscitate (DNR) tattoo. They suggested that it was most reasonable to infer that the tattoo expressed an authentic preference, that what might be seen as caution could also be seen as standing on ceremony, and that the law is sometimes not nimble enough to support patient-centered care and respect for patients' best interests. A DNR order was written. Subsequently, the social work department obtained a copy of his Florida Department of Health "out-of-hospital" DNR order, which was consistent with the tattoo. The patient's clinical status deteriorated throughout the night, and he died without undergoing cardiopulmonary respiration or advanced airway management.

This patient's tattooed DNR request produced more confusion than clarity, given concerns about its legality and likely unfounded beliefs¹ that tattoos might represent permanent reminders of regretted decisions made while the person was intoxicated. We were relieved to find his written DNR request, especially because a review of the literature identified a case report of a person whose DNR tattoo did not reflect his current wishes.² Despite the well-known difficulties that patients have in making their end-of-life wishes known,³-⁵ this case report neither supports nor opposes the use of tattoos to express end-of-life wishes when the person is incapacitated.

based on the story above answer the following questions

1. What are the dimensions of the ethical dilemma?
2. What are the potential organizational policies to which you will refer?
3. Analyze the situation using one of the ethical theories discussed in the textbook. Describe how one might formulate assistance to the clinical staff using this theory.
4. Describe the importance of reasoning in the decision-making process.
5. Considering this dilemma, describe how a Christian worldview would inform ethical responsibilities.

Answer rating: 100% (QA)

Dimensions of the Ethical Dilemma 1 Autonomy vs Beneficence The patients autonomy as expressed through his tattooed DNR request conflicts with the med... View the full answer