Cardiopulmonary resuscitation — time for a change in the paradigm?

Egerton-Warburton, Diana

doi:10.5694/mja14.01508

Topics

To the Editor: Levinson and Mills are to be lauded for their article on the need to rethink our approach to cardiopulmonary resuscitation in hospitalised patients.1 They outline the barriers to open discussion at an individual and a society level. However, they have omitted a key barrier: the language that we use to discuss the topic.

Monash Health, Melbourne, VIC.

Correspondence: diana.egertonwarburton@monashhealth.org

Competing interests:

No relevant disclosures.

1. Levinson M, Mills A. Cardiopulmonary resuscitation — time for a change in the paradigm? Med J Aust 2014; 201: 152-154. <MJA full text>
2. Meyer C. Allow natural death — an alternative to DNR? http://www. hospicepatients.org/and.html (accessed Oct 2014).
3. Venneman SS, Narnor-Harris P, Perish H, Hamilton M. “Allow natural death” versus “do not resuscitate”: three words that can change a life. J Med Ethics 2008; 34: 2-6.
4. Breault JL. DNR, DNAR, or AND? Is language important? Ochsner J 2011; 11: 302-306.

Online responses are no longer available. Please refer to our instructions for authors page for more information.