A study of the Long-Term Care Ombudsman in each state and the District of Columbia found that fourteen of the twenty-five respondents did not know when their state laws allowed nursing homes to refuse to honor patient end-of-life wishes. The Ombudsman is supposed to be an advocate for residents of nursing homes and a source of information. State laws vary as to when a facility may refuse to honor treatment directives and what it must do if it will not honor a patient wish. Patients and their families who do not know that an end-of-life directive will not be honored until the patient is dying may turn to the ombudsman for assistance. The ombudsman must know the laws of the state to intercede for the patient and to advocate for policy changes when the need for change is suggested.
AddelstoneS.1993. Liability for improper maintenance of life support: Balancing patient and physician autonomy. Vanderbilt Law Review46 (October): 1255–92.
BradleyE.WalkerL.BlechnerB., and WetleT.. 1997. Assessing capacity to participate in discussions of advance directives in nursing homes: findings from a study of Patient Self-Determination Act. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society45 (1): 79–83.
4.
BradleyE.WetleT., and HorowitzS.. 1998. The Patient Self-Determination Act and advance directive completion in nursing homes. Archives of Family Medicine7 (5): 417–23.
5.
CastleN., and MorV.. 1998. Advance care planning in nursing homes: pre- and post-Patient Self-Determination Act. Health Services Research33 (1): 101–24.
6.
DublerN.PostL., and MittyE.. 1998. Decisions regarding transfers from nursing homes to acute care hospitals: Final report to the Kornfeld Foundation (Unpublished).
7.
GhusnH.TeasdaleT., and JordanD.. 1997. Continuity of do-not resuscitate orders between hospital and nursing home settings. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society45 (4): 465–69.
8.
GoldR.1998. Conscience makes a comeback. The Guttmacher Report on Public PolicyI (1).
9.
The Hastings Center. 1987. Guidelines on the termination of life-sustaining treatment and the care of the dying. Briarcliff Manor, NY: Author.
10.
HosayC.2002. Compliance with patients' end-of-life wishes by nursing homes in New York City with conscience policies. Omega: Journal of Death and Dying44 (1).
11.
HosayC.2003. The need to educate nursing home administrators about variations in state legislation affecting patients' rights to refuse treatment. Illness, Crisis & Loss11 (2).
12.
Institute of Medicine. Committee to Evaluate the State Long-Term Care Ombudsman Programs. 1995. Real people, real problems: An evaluation of the Long-Term Care Ombudsman Programs of the Older Americans Act. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
13.
JosephA., and BoultC.. 1998. Managed primary care of nursing home residents. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society46 (9): 152–56.
14.
KappM.1995. Medical decisionmaking for older adults in institutional settings: is beneficence dead in an age of risk management?Issues in Law and Medicine11 (1): 29–46.
15.
LevinJ.WengerN.OuslanderJ.ZellmanG.SchnelleJ.BuchananJ.HirschS., and ReubenD.. 1999. Life-sustaining treatment decisions for nursing home residents: who discusses, who decided and what is decided?Journal of the American Geriatrics Society47 (1): 82–87.
16.
MaloneyS.FinnJ.BloomD., and AndersenJ.. 1996. Personal decisionmaking styles and long-term care choices. Health Care Financing Review18(1): 144–55.
17.
MezeyM.MittyE.RappaportM., and RamseyG.. 1997. Implementation of the Patient Self-Determination Act in nursing homes in New York City. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society45 (1): 43–49.
18.
MilesS.KoeppR., and WeberE.. 1996. Advance end-of-life treatment planning: a research review. Archives of Internal Medicine156:1062–68.
19.
National Citizen's Coalition for Nursing Home Reform. n.d. Retrieved January 2000 from www.nccnhr.org/ombudsman.html.
20.
The New York State Task Force on Life and the Law. 1992. When others must choose: Deciding for patients without capacity. Albany: New York State Department of Health.
21.
PalkerN., & Nettles-CarsonB.. 1995. The prevalence of advance directives: lessons from a nursing home. Nurse Practitioner20 (2): 7–8, 13, 17–18, passim.
22.
SiegertE.ClippE.MulhausenP., and KochersbergerG.. 1996. Impact of advance directive videotape on patient comprehension and treatment preferences. Archives of Family Medicine5 (4): 207–12.
23.
SingerP.MartinD.LaveryD.ThielE.KeinerM., and MendelssohnD.. 1998. Reconceptualizing advance care planning from the patient's perspective. Archives of Internal Medicine158:679–884.
24.
The SUPPORT Investigators. 1997. Perceptions by family members of the dying experience of older and seriously ill patients. Annals of Internal Medicine126 (2): 97–106.
25.
The SUPPORT Investigators: LynnJ.TenoJ.PhillipsR.WuA.DesbiensN.HarroldJ., and ConnorsA.Jr.1995. A controlled trial to improve care for seriously ill hospitalized patients: the study to understand prognoses and preferences for outcomes and risks of treatment. Journal of the American Medical Association274:1591–98.
26.
TenoJ.BrancoK.MorV.PhillipsC.MorrisJ., and FriesB.. 1997. Changes in advance care planning in nursing homes before and after the patient self-determination act: report of a 10 state survey. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society45 (8): 939–44.
27.
TulskyJ.FischerG.RoseM., and ArnoldR.. 1998. Opening the black box: How do physicians communicate about advance directives. Annals of Internal Medicine129 (6): 441–49.
28.
WunderlichG., and HohlerP., eds. 2001. Institute of Medicine. Report of the Committee on Improving Quality in Long-Term Care. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
