Posted on 10/20/2005 5:52:22 PM PDT by wagglebee
He says he wants to live. But his wife, caregivers and South Carolina state officials are so focused on carrying out a decade-old, out-of-state living will that 79-year-old Jimmy Chambers can't get a word in edgewise.
That's the account of 10 of Chambers's children and their spouses who signed sworn affidavits in an attempt to block their mother from removing his life-sustaining ventilator, which would cause his death.
It's a case that's reminiscent of the Terri Schiavo controversy which captured the attention of millions around the world, in which a fault line opened up in the middle of a formerly close-knit family, splitting it into pieces over whether to end a loved one's life or allow them to live.
"Our family has meant everything to all of us for all these years. We never thought we'd be in this place," Deanna Potter, one of the children seeking to preserve her father's life, told WND.
The ordeal began August 20 in Naples, Florida, when the "active" and "vibrant" Chambers hopped on a riding lawnmower to help out with his son's yard work. Chambers apparently took his eyes off the road briefly and by the time he fixed his gaze back forward, a hefty tree limb struck him and bent him backwards over the seat of the mower. He was found sometime later lying unconscious on the ground.
Chambers suffered a broken back, a spinal chord injury and a torn aorta. Doctors didn't think he would survive the emergency room. He surprised them.
"You just can't keep him down," Potter marveled. "My father had polio when he was younger and his legs were weakened by that, so he was getting to the point where he couldn't walk for any period of time. But he was always active and looking for things to do. He has a couple of those scooters and scooted all over where he lives."
Two days after the accident, doctors performed surgery and succeeded in repairing Chambers's back, but determined he had become paraplegic. Spinal shock left him dependent on a ventilator, and a gastric feeding tube was inserted into his abdomen.
The prognosis was grim. Doctors weren't sure whether the Yuma, Arizona, resident would ever be able to come off of the ventilator and feeding tube.
That's when the family unity cracked.
Divided over life, death
Chambers's wife of 58 years, Viola, and one daughter began advocating removal of the ventilator and ending his life, according to Potter. Mrs. Chambers presented a living will her husband signed in 1990 when the couple lived in Iowa. The document indicated that should he have an "incurable or irreversible condition that will result either in death within a relatively short period of time" it was his desire that his life not be prolonged by the administration of life-sustaining procedures.
Chambers did not designate a power of attorney or anyone to serve as medical decision maker in the event of his incapacitation. He has not been declared incapacitated, however, so the family decided to put the life-or-death question to him.
On September 8, after having been off morphine and other mind-altering drugs for 10 hours, the family assembled in Chambers's room at Naples Community Hospital. Present were Viola Chambers, 10 children and Chambers's treating physician, Dr. Kenneth Bookman.
"We all believed that daddy would elect to discontinue the ventilator," Potter told WND. "I went there with the determination that if that's what he chose, I would support him and stand there and love him and not leave that room until he left us."
Again, Chambers surprised them.
"He was asked specifically if he wanted to stay on the ventilator and his answer was 'yes,'" wrote Bookman in a notarized letter documenting the event, a copy of which was supplied to WND.
"He was asked if he understood that he would likely never go home again, and would likely live in a ventilator facility, on the ventilator, for the rest of his life and his answer was, 'yes,'" Bookman's letter continued. "He was asked if he wanted to be removed from the ventilator and his answer was 'no.' He was asked if he understood that he would die if he would be removed from the ventilator and his answer was, 'yes.'"
Bookman states he felt that Chambers was off of sedation and aware enough to comprehend and make decisions regarding life support.
What reportedly happened next shocked Potter: "When my father said that he wanted to live and he wanted to be treated, my mother said to him in very emphatic tones, 'Jim, do you really want to live in this body? Don't you want to go to heaven and be with Jerry?' He's my younger brother who died. And she said it twice. And the room absolutely went nuts. Everybody was outraged that she was trying to talk him into dying. ... He just stared at her as if she lost her mind. He didn't respond at all."
When contacted by WND, Viola Chambers declined to comment.
According to Iowa law, a living will "may be revoked in any manner by which the Declarant is able to communicate the Declarant's intent to evoke."
Bookman, Potter and her siblings considered the Iowa living will revoked and transferred Chambers two weeks later to Anne Maria Rehabilitation and Nursing Center, a facility that specializes in rehabilitating ventilator patients, in North Augusta, South Carolina.
'Revoked' living will lives on
According to documents filed with the court, Chambers's new treating physician, Dr. Nicholas Sanito, found Chambers "awake, alert and interactive" during an examination on September 26.
"He shakes my hands. He was trying to speak, but I couldn't read his lips all that well," Sanito wrote.
Another assessment completed of Chambers on Sept. 28 by Angie Beverly, the activities director at the facility, found Chambers could see, hear and comprehend and that he "tried to communicate."
"He could sometimes make himself understood and ... tried to use tools, such as a white board and marker and a magnetic letter board to communicate. He wrote a letter on the white board, although it took tremendous effort. He has a strong desire to communicate," Beverly concluded, according to a synopsis of the assessment provided to WND.
Viola Chambers, however, informed Sanito and the nursing staff about the Iowa living will and a Do- Not-Resuscitate order and acted to enforce both. Potter asserts her mother requests morphine and another drug be dispensed to her father in such a way that he is infrequently sober enough to communicate and ordered the removal of all communication devices from his room, including his nurse call button.
Mrs. Chambers also denied her husband medical treatment for pneumonia and ordered he only be given "comfort care," according to Potter.
The nursing home administrator, Marcy Drewry, was unavailable for comment.
While their father's lungs slowly filled with fluid and his extremities began to swell, Potter and her siblings mobilized to save his life, which meant knocking heads with their own mother.
"I can only say that she is not well," Potter said, adding that she believes her mother suffers from the adult version of the mental health disorder, Munchausen by Proxy. "She's on a mission now. I don't think there will be any reasoning with her in this process. The power is simply going to have to be taken from her hands."
Following South Carolina law, the nursing home staff considers Viola Chambers to be the person with the authority over the patient and the person they need to answer to. The Adult Health Care Consent Act gives the spouse the highest priority to make medical decisions in the absence of a health care power of attorney.
After Potter and her siblings filed a police report accusing their mother of "elder abuse," the state agency designated by the Department of Social Services to investigate such complaints looked into the matter. Susan Garen, the regional Long Term Care Ombudsman, confirmed Viola Chambers had the authority to direct her husband's care. After consulting with the State Long Term Care Ombudsman, Jon Cook, Garen concluded no investigation would be done.
"Mr. Cook determined that it is not within the scope of the long term care ombudsman to determine if the decisions made by the medical decision maker were in the best interest of the resident or not," Garen wrote in an October 6 report.
"No agency gets involved in family disputes. If there is a family dispute then we ask that they settle that in court to determine guardianship," Cook told WND. "On cases where there's a legal representative, we really have to do what they say. Especially when there's a living will that hasn't been revoked."
When WND informed Cook that family members assert the living will was revoked, he replied: "That's up in the air. I haven't seen anything that says it's revoked. Nobody can prove it is. That's why I wanted the probate court to handle that. We just can't get involved."
The hands-off approach to the case by state agencies charged with the responsibility of advocating on behalf of the vulnerable was similarly experienced by those seeking to preserve Terri Schiavo's life.
Dispute lands in court
On October 6, Randall Chambers filed an emergency petition seeking appointment as temporary guardian of his father. Six days later, according to court documents, Viola Chambers countered with her own petition.
"As his wife of 58 years, I am far more intimately aware of my husband's wishes and desires as it pertains to his health care treatment than any of my children," stated Viola Chambers in the petition. "I therefore object to the appointment of my son, Randall Chambers, as temporary Guardian for my husband as his appointment will undermine and deprive my husband of the healthcare he wishes and desires and which he has expressed to me on many occasions and also in writing."
The court appointed an independent guardian ad litem, Paige Weeks Johnson, to investigate the case and make a recommendation to the court on behalf of Chambers. In her preliminary report, Johnson recommended the court order the ventilator and feeding tube not be removed until further order of the court, and until she has the opportunity to speak with the treating physician. Still, the authority to make other treatment decisions rests with Viola Chambers.
As their father crept closer to death in the absence of antibiotics, according to Potter, the siblings trained their sights on the treating physician at the nursing home. They faxed him a letter asserting their mother had breached her fiduciary responsibility to their father. They attached Bookman's letter along with the 10 affidavits from family members all swearing Chambers had revoked the living will and wanted to live.
"We told the doctor, 'We will sue you if anything happens to our father.' We believe that has gotten him to be a little more involved," said Potter.
Chambers was subsequently transported to the hospital where he is now receiving treatment for the pneumonia. Meanwhile, the guardianship battle continues.
"I can't believe what you have to come up with in order to preserve this life – this vibrant, strong man who wants to live," said Potter. "It's incredible."
Thank you both for sharing this difficult experience with us. I'm sure we'll all have many questions for you, but right now, it's all I can do to soak in what you've told us. I'll continue to pray for God to bring you comfort and strength.
Thank you for the ping.
I completely agree that it is a state issue by the constitution, but where does one turn if the state fails in its responsibilities to protect its citizens? The contstitution guarentees state's rights only if they uphold the resposibilities that go hand and hand with those rights. We went through all the proper channels in SC law, each division passed the buck to another. None were much help. Furthermore, it is everyone's resposibility to ensure this entire country is something for us to be proud of. If we each say "Well its not happening to me so I won't worry about it" not only have we reared a generation of egocentric scapegoaters, but we have also set the stage for a disgraceful country.
Good for you (although I'm not sure there are ever any guarantees on anything)!
Thanks, cyn!
Welcome to both of you, and thank you for sharing your story. You are right that we cannot be quiet about these injustices when they happen, and it seems that at least we have the internet to use as a resource when these things happen. Maybe no one will pay attention, but SOME OF US WILL!
I'm very sorry that you've had to go through this, but I pray that your family can be the close undivided family that you used to be. Please stay in touch and let us know if there is any way we can be of help.
This isn't necessarily for you but you were the last poster that came up. This has been a very powerful thread. I'm glad I read all the way through and wanted to bump it back up. Prayers for the Chambers family.
Hey, Joe and Gondring, be nice to these two ladies!
Well then, here's another bump! I'm glad you read all the way through!!
My, this road's getting bumpy!
Very! LOL! BTTT!
Have you contacted Diana Lynne for a follow-up story?
Not everything in life is as cynical as Freepers make them out to be (or WND for that matter). I am strongly on the side of spouses normally, and because I saw a case of a stress decision up close I will not automatically side with the children. I think these cases are way to complex, personal, and individual to write up in a newspaper, and to take sides.
Three years ago, my Grandfather was failing fast. He became unable to swallow food without choking, and aspirating everything. He also had a living will in place that state no ventilators, or feeding tubes. When he was healthy, his greatest joy in life was a good meal, at a good restaurant. He would plan vacations around the 5 star restaurants he wanted to visit.
By the time he had the feeding problems, he was also diagnosed as terminal. But he was still lucid. The doctors asked him if he intended to fulfill his living will, and would still refuse the feeding tube. During a moment of what I can only describe as fear of dying, he told the Dr. to put the tube in. His Dr. then went to my Grandma and told her that if she thought he was not lucid they could petition the court to transfer decision making to her. She knew she could never live with herself if she did that so she had the Dr. put the tube in. Within 2 days, he was miserable. All of the joy of life left, and he was depressed and solemn. He wanted to have the tube withdrawn, but because of legal implications, it is much easier to put it in, than to remove it. The Dr. refused.
He spent the last two months of his life miserable, and bitter, and to this day, my Grandma wonders what could have been. She is racked with guilt, and the last memories of her life long partner are not happy. For that reason, I am always hesitant to "side" with anyone but a long term spouse.
Before all of my fellow Freepers scream about my love of death (believe me I went through it all during the Schiavo ordeal), please remember there is always two sides to every story. And to you Billbears, Thank You for not backing down.
Those who claimed that the Terri Schiavo case wasn't a step on a slippery slope toward the continuing devaluing of innocent human life were partially correct. It wasn't on a slippery slope, it was on a greased slaughterhouse entrails chute straight to legalized murder.
Have you read to the end of the thread before you posted to billbears?
You both and your family have my utmost sympathy. Thank you so much for posting your messages on this board. Kalin, your description of your granddaddy reminded me of some of my older family members, and I can see that he most definitely knew what he wanted. His word should have been respected.
Family is so important, and I am so very sorry that yours has suffered such a rift. You have your wonderful memories of your granddaddy. No one can take that away from you.
DadsGirl, it is entirely possible that your dad was suffocated. Your dad's word should have been enough. If he was willing to live on a ventilator, no one should have had the power to override him. We here are only average everyday Americans, but when we come across abuse of folks like your dad, we know that we indeed are our brother's keeper.
Once again, my sincere condolences to both of you and your family.
Rose
Thanks for the ping!
My main point was that not every situation is how it seems, and I will still want to hear both sides before I make a judgment. I will still be very hesitant to ever go against a spouse, whom presumably knows more about her husbands wants than anyone.
I do Thank You for not automatically flaming me, because that is what I experienced in the past when I was hesitant to not take Michael Schiavos side.
bttt
It's understandable. We each have our own perspective.
Obviously someone in charge of medical cost containment is going to see things differently than someone with an emotional attachment to the patient.
Thank you for sharing your views.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.