INTRODUCTION:

GOOD DAY EVERYONE, ESPECIALLY TO THE RESPECTABLE

MEMBERS OF THE PANEL THAT’S WITH US TODAY. SIR JOHN PAULO

CALMA, SIR LEOVER CARANTO AND MA’AM MARIZ BENICO. WE ARE

THE 5TH GROUP TO PRESENT OUR RESEARCH STUDY, ENTITLED THE

Lived Experiences of Filipino Family Members who signed a Do-Not-

Resuscitate (DNR) Contract.

Over the past few decades the family's reaction to the coding

status of a terminally sick family member has received significant

attention as a result of changes that have taken place in medical

therapy. The development of CPR, the greater responsibility by patients

and families in regards to health care decisions and lastly the legislation

pertaining to do-not-resuscitate policy and medical self-determination.

But today's technological advancements have permanently changed

people's conceptions of how the end-of-life process should be handled,

necessitating more difficult ethical decisions to be made by experts, the

patient, and frequently the patient's family.

When a patient’s heart seems to be nearing a stop, it is generally

felt that the morally best approach is to try a new intervention. In

contrast to this common practice, in most instances, the morally safer

route is the DNR. Such intervention is ethically justified only if both of

the following conditions have been met: the treatment must be

medically futile and there must be consent to the DNR (Welie JV, 2014).
 RRL:

The quest of life extension should take into account a person's

quality of life as well as any dangers and treatment costs. Seeing a

dying person suffer can be virtually unbearable for family members.

According to the DNR order, the patient will receive hospice care as

soon as their time is up and won't pass away with a tube in any part of

their body. This does not imply that the patient will pass away without

assistance or company. It could seem futile to perform CPR when the

patient's quality of life is so poor that, even if CPR is successful in

restoring circulatory stability, no meaningful survival is anticipated.

Consenting to a do-not-resuscitate agreement can be somewhat

of a solution to ending the pain and suffering of a terminally ill patient,

as well as their immediate families. However, in certain circumstances,

it doesn't necessarily mean relief for the main decision-maker because

the guilt will always be there. Having the resolve to affirm a DNR
agreement is such heavy baggage to carry. Being aware that you were

the one to let your family member pass, even in a peaceful way, is a

thing no one desires to do.