Relatives being present at resuscitation (clearly sens)

This is an interesting article:

http://www.trauma.org/index.php/main/article/413/

But I don't have the bark for a debate today myself.

Sorry didn't see funeral flowers post. Will sign in and delete and maybe re-post later.

I was recusitated after giving birth and my husband was present as there wasn't time to get him out of the room.

I think it is the worst thing he has witnessed. It is something that will stay with him forever and doesn't ever want us to have another child after seeing that and the other things that happened at that time.

So for us, it was not a good idea for us to be there. I also think he was shouting at the consultant to not let me die, which probably didn't help the staff whilst they were doing their jobs.

So no, not a good idea in my experience.

No, I wouldn't want to see a relative being resuscitated. I'd rather the medical staff were allowed to get on with what they need to do without me being there getting upset and potentially getting in the way. I think a resuscitation could probably look very brutal to someone who didn't understand what was going on, so would be very traumatic to watch.

I was with Camperboy when he died in hospital last year. I didn't manage to get to the hospital in time in the first instance after he'd had his brain haemorrhage and had to wait in the relatives' room. I was then let into the room to see him and then went up to the ICU with him before he was taken to another hospital. He lasted another week before dying without regaining consciousness and I was with him when the process all started through to brain stem death. I witnessed the 5 tests for brain stem death and stayed with him while he was on the ventilator for his organs to be preserved. When I arrived at the hospital the next day, I could go and see him, which I did. It helped me a lot in seeing the whole thing through from beginning to end. I think that it should be kept as a matter of choice whether relatives are present, but saying that, it may be too harrowing for some people - others, get closure from it.

Gosh, rupertcat, how awful for your H. ?

I find resus attempts harrowing and they are part of my every day job, hence why I found this guidance slightly surprising.

I'm having trouble signing in to delete but will happily keep trying to do so if requested.

Please don't delete - it's an interesting debate.

The rational part of me thinks it could be a good idea e.g. seeing doctors are doing everything they can, being close to your loved one etc. but who can possibly guess how they would react in such a situation? You run the risk of hindering the process rather than helping. On balance, I'd probably keep the status quo.

I can see *some* benefits for *some* people but, on the whole, I think that overwhelmingly it would be unhelpful to allow access to acute resuscitations (for staff and witnesses alike). Of course, sometimes I'm sure it cannot be avoided, and I think it must be awful to be led away form a scenario where your loved one is being worked on. However, to be voluntarily introduced to the scenario is not, I think, appropriate (not least for reasons of consent from the victim- I would hate to think of my family witnessing me being resuscitated- or not, as the case may be).

Its a firm no from me.

what about things like heart massage (or whatever the right term is)? i wouldnt want to be there whilst they were opening up a relative. not a chance.

But I think that there should be the choice - if that's at all possible (as wasn't in the case of Rupercat).

There's no way I would want to be there. I would be screaming and making a right fuss and as someone said that can't be good for the consultants. I think there has to be a level of trust that they will do all they can and you have to leave them to get on with their job. I'm not even sure I can see why anyone would want to be there to be honest but then I have a very unhealthy phobia of people dying.

No, don't delete RA. It's an interesting debate.

I think, for me, it depends whether you are in an emergency situation or not, and I imagine that recusitation is always an emergency. Therefore I can't imagine this ever being undertaken in a way that could be comforting to a relative.

In Campergirl's tragic situation, I can understand that maybe witnessing all the tests and being able to be there may have provided some small comfort.

? to CG

I wouldn't want to be there as I know I wouldn't handle it very well.

Reading the two case studies in the link, I think they are offering a slightly skewed impression. In the first one where the woman didn't see her loved one being resusitated it stated it as if she would have got to see them if she had been allowed in. But really, would she? I imagine she'd only have been in one end of the room, looking on with wires, machines and many staff working their hardest to save that life. Its not like she'd have been given a final moment to cherish.

Its so difficult as I guess I have no idea what comfort you'd get from that unless you were in that situation. For me though, I think I'd be feeling in a similar way to Mr Rupercat.

I think that's the difficulty. In an emergency resuscitation situation, do the medics really have the time to ask relatives to leave (or even invite them in)? It adds a layer of complexity to an already difficult situation. Speaking for myself, I could find myself unable to function and yet be grateful for being ushered away rather than seeing something potentially awful. I just think the negatives outweigh the benefits for a majority - pick and choosing according to the circumstances is far too difficult.

Hmmm... This is an interesting topic. When I was at work a good few years ago, I had a telephone call to say my father had suffered a heart attack and was in hospital. My mother was a good 3 hours away visiting her parents, my brother still further away. So I dropped work and raced over to the hospital, when I was sitting with him watching the monitors etc, it did cross my mind what I should do if he required resusication - on one hand, I think it would have been traumatic and upsetting to witness, on the other hand, I would not have wanted my father to feel alone, especially if he died. One yet another hand(!) I don't think my father would have wanted me there if things were undignified for him.

It's a tough one.

OK, point taken - now I'll give a different scenario - husband and wife at home one Sunday afternoon, he collapses with a heart attack, wife calls paramedics - the choice is not given then.

Btw: For what it's worth and just as an aside - My Dad died in hospital and my Mum has never got over not being there and him "going on his own". But that's a quote from someone with a different perspective on things.

At this stage - do posters think I should bow out of this thread? I'm quite happy to do so.....

No way - your perspective is invaluable. Don't think that I'm getting at you because I'm not. I'm purely hypothesising (as are many others) as we haven't been through such a harrowing experience.

With reference to your first point, there can't be a choice, can there? And I would guess in any emergency situation there might not be the additional resources to move a relative into a different area. Perhaps a fair balance would be the presumption of moving someone away unless they strongly objected or were likely to cause a problem?

No way, not from me anyway.

I am not sure we are talking about exactly the same situation though (although I am afraid I don't know the specifics of your situation - sounds heartbreaking ?).

Often if people are on life support the relatives are there when it is turned off and rightly so. But I was trying to allude to the situation of one's heart actually stopping and having to have CPR/shocks. I'm not sure if this is what you witnessed?

Don't worry - I don't think anyone is getting at me at all. I just don't want people thinking that I think I'm in some way "superior" because I've experienced being at the rescus and then the tests when it didn't work.

No, you're quite right, in my first point, there is no choice - but does that make it any better? No choice in one set of circumstances, but having a choice in another. I think I come from the perspective of being there for (pretty much) everything, fighting his corner for as long as it was necessary and then seeing it through to the end.

Now here are two scenarios to think about - one patient has been unconscious and then needs rescus and another patient, for whom it all happens rather suddenly.....

Campergirl, please don't feel you can't contribute to the thread. You have a different perspective due to your experiences but that shouldn't exclude you from the discussion ?

I think I would want to be there. I know the way that my mind works- if a relative died and I hadn't been there to witness attempted resuscitation, I wouldn't be able to accept that everything possible had been done but instead dwell on ridiculous possibilities (could I have done something? Did they really do what they said?) in a way I think would be quite unhealthy. I also feel, particularly in relation to my children, that they are my responsibility and that, even if all I could do was be present, I would want to do that- i find the idea of not being there quite horrific actually.

I appreciate that it would be unimaginably awful, but I think I would find it less awful than the idea of them dying without me being there, if I could be there (even if they weren't conscious).

No, I didn't witness this type of rescus. See my other post on this thread. But I still think that the choice (if possible) should be there - it may help some people's grief process.

Absolutely yes for me. But I've been working in the NHS for over 13 years amongst generally young, well people, so no expectation of demise. And I've had a close relative die in an accident - if I was there, there's no way I wouldn't want to be with them at the end. And to be sure in my own mind that everything had been done.

That said, I wouldn't seek resus for a relative with an immediately terminal condition. So it would be quite a specific circumstance really - an unexpected event, by that evaluation.

I think it makes sense to allow it. Obviously all those on theis thread who have said "No, I would hate to see that" could and would choose not to, and presumably those who did want to be there would have the procedure explained ot them first?

I think that in an emergency situation, your knee-jerk reaction would generally steer you in the right direction for you. I say this, as I'd think there wouldn't be time to explain the procedure first - but then, I haven't experienced a rescus from a cardiac arrest, so I might be talking out of the back of my head.

I have an 80yr old Aunt who for the last 7 years have never got over the guilt of allowing my dad (her brother) to go to hospital alone. He ended up being revived twice. My mother had that same day come out of hospital with a new hip. At 4am, unable to move, she called my Aunt (I was away at Uni). My Aunt called 999 because of bad snow. My Aunt arrived just as the ambulance did, and my dad was talking etc - she made the choice to stay with my Mum who was in a great deal of pain also.

My Dad's heart stopped at the hospital and after being revived he slipped into a coma. He now has severe brain damage and needs 24hr nursing care. For 7 yrs, my Aunt has blamed herself for allowing him to be alone and the idea that he was revived, regain consciousness and was aware then his heart stopped again has really eaten away at her.

I got there as quickly as I could, my Dad was already in a coma by then and remained so for a long time. I have never really thought about it, as I couldn't change the fact I wasn't there, but this thread has really made me consider it. If I had the choice, I would have wanted to be there with him just to reassure him as I feel guilty that he was alone.

TG

Obviously that only applies in situations where the was time ?

I was asked to leave the room when they tried to resuscitate my jimmy 13 days ago. I didnt know I had a choice. It was hard waiting outside the room for the 10 minutes it took them before they told me they couldn't save him but if I had a choice, I would not have wanted to see the ambulance crew working on him.

In a similar, but not identical vein, the ambulance crew refused to allow my Dad to go with my brother on a blue light from the scene of the accident. He died in the ambulance, and my Dad heard the news, alone, over the police radio at the Station where they were trying to contact my Mum.

He knew Nick wasn't going to make it anyway - Dad was in the Military Police and had seen a lot of fatal accidents, and could see cerebral fluid, so he knew it was all but over. But it took him over 20 years to tell me how it had actually been because he found it so painful to tell, and knew I'd be devastated. Which I was. And he's never got over it.

He went out one day, and I never saw him again. It took months before I accepted there hadn't been some awful mistake. Sometimes you need to see.

What we have been taught is that it should only be allowed if there is a 'spare' member of staff available to look after the relative and explain exactly what is happening - as what is done can look, and is, very distressing: intubation, chest compressions (pretty agressive), shocks, trying to get several needles in etc.

I'm not sure I've ever been to an arrest where there's been a 'spare' member of staff tbh.

I would like to be there if I wasn't in the way.

I've typed something and deleted it three times as I can't find the right words so I'll just say that.

? to Campergirl and Sandie.

In the case of my husband or children: absolutely yes would I want to be there. The idea that they would go "alone" without me, however hard I found it, is almost unbearable. However, if I were to die, I wouldn't want them to be there. I'd prefer that they were out of the room and would be able to remember me happy and alive.

If it were my parents, brother or a member of the wider family, I think it would be much more of an intellectual / emotional decision rather than a deep instinctive one. It would depend on the circumstances. I think this is more a reflection of my perception of self-responsibility, as much as anything else.

I guess one of the dangers of allowing relatives to be present during resuss is possibly the number of people who would want to access the room to witness it. Having spent a significant amount of two pregnancies in hospital, you would not believe how many families insisted on attending the labouring mother. I would imagine this would be all the more apparant at the moment of death.