Do You Want to be Autopsied?
Routine hospital autopsies, performed by pathologists, in the past was a not an uncommon result after a patent died in the hospital. Families were routinely asked for permission for the autopsy. In recent years, routine autopsies far less frequent. According to a recent report by the CDC (United State Center for Disease Control) written by Donna L. Hoyert the key findings were as follows:
- The percentage of deaths for which an autopsy was performed declined more than 50 percent from 1972 through 2007, from 19.3 percent to 8.5 percent.
- External causes accounted for 9 of the 10 most frequently autopsied causes of death.
- The percentage autopsied declined with age after ages 15–24: from 60 percent at 15–24, to 11 percent at 55–64, to less than 5 percent at 65–74.
- In 1972, 79 percent of autopsies were performed for deaths due to disease conditions and 19 percent for deaths due to external causes. By 2007, the respective percentages were 46 percent and 50 percent.
- While the age distribution of deaths shifted to older ages from 1972 through 2007, autopsied deaths were increasingly concentrated in the age groups 1–34 and 35–64.
- Pathologists don’t like autopsies because they can be unpleasant, smelly, time-consuming, unappreciated, often not specifically paid for, and they take time away from other tasks viewed as more important, appreciated, pleasant, and lucrative.
- Clinicians do not like autopsies because it is uncomfortable to face a family that has lost a loved one. The physician must confront a level of failure because of the death, a tarnishing of the doctor-as-god image. Autopsy surprises might lead to an unhappy family, quality assurance committee concerns, possible litigation, and even a report to the state medical board.
- Hospital administrators do not like autopsies because they prefer not to dwell on unfavorable results of hospitalization. They claim difficulty finding the money to pay for them and can never make a profit from autopsies. They often have little medical or scientific background that would encourage curiosity and they tend to do mostly what licensing and accrediting agencies require; these remain strangely silent.
- Third-party payers do not like autopsies because they are an expense, and are performed on people who are already dead.
- Families of patients do not like autopsies because they are ill-informed about their value, afraid that it might cost them money, and some feel that the deceased person has already been through too much of an ordeal in dying.
Graphic: From Wikimedia Commons: "The Anatomy Lesson of Dr. Nicolaes Tulp" Rembrandt, 1632
8 Comments:
Well it is sort of an unpleasant thought, so I guess I would prefer not. However, if there was some question of whether I got the proper care, and a medical mistake might be discovered, then yes.
TAM
TAM, Unpleasant thought? Would an autopsy would provoke a less pleasant thought than the thought of the incineration of cremation? And for you, the autopsy must be only for medico-legal reasons? Nothing further? ..Maurice.
I have to agree with TAM that the thought of being autopsied is unpleasant. But, as an organ donor, I fully expect to have pieces of me removed prior to burial. Neither the removal of my organs, nor being buried, are particularly happy thoughts, either. For that matter, neither is being dead!
Honestly, I would rather not think about any of it. But, I do take comfort in the fact that, being dead, none of it will bother me, when it occurs.
NO
It's essentially locking the barn door after the horse is out.
It would be interesting to know what percentage of autopsies find something useful to the patient's relatives or descendents, but I suspect it is very small and barring some specific triggering condition, not worth the expense.
Further, many insurance companies will not pay for them unless there is a compelling reason & the patient's family winds up stuck with the bill.
Hexanchus, but maybe this might be the best way to develop if not a better barn door itself, at least a better barn door locking system. ..Maurice.
Hmm.. well I'm not sure I can explain why, but while I'm perfectly fine with being an organ donor, an autopsy just still isn't a plesant thought. I guess with organ donation, I know it is benefitting someone. And it seems more like a surgery (maybe I'm wrong there). Cremation is all at once, the body is entire. An autopsy really slits you open stem to stern. Just feels worse, emotionally, not logically.
I do not have siblings or children, so medico-legal reasons are all I can think of - if a serious mistake was made, and exposed by my autopsy, that might protect the living from further such mistakes. If I had children or someone who would benefit, then it would be ok with me, but I don't.
TAM
No way!!! But there are autopsies and autopsies. I would dread the part of the procedure in which a serrated knife is used on the skull to get to the brain. Never. Like many things in the medical world, once you give them a pass they do anything they want, whether it's really necessary or not. Over here, a coroner's autopsy of a teenage girl that was shot by an ex-boyfriend did little or nothing to build a case.
It might come accompaned by an array of other tests that have nothing to do with wht is being investigated.
Besides it's butchery, really.
Maria, "butchery", really?? Since the definition of butchery in Merriam-Webster dictionary is "1. Chiefly British: Slaughterhouse.
2. The preparation of meat for sale.
3. Cruel and ruthless slaughter of human beings.
4. Botch (As a verb- botch means: to foul up hopelessly.)
With regard to "butchery", I don't see any relationship of a professional autopsy to definitions 1, 2 or 3. And even 4, mistakes during the procedure may occur, it is only human, but all the ones I have attended and witnessed, there was only strict professional behavior and of course no human was slaughtered since the patient was already deceased.
Nevertheless, Maria, I am certain you are not alone in your description of an autopsy. ..Maurice.
Post a Comment
<< Home