Nutrition Support and the Troubling Trichotomy: A Call to Action

Have the Answers to Common Legal Questions Concerning Nutrition Support Changed Over the Past Decade? 10 Questions for 10 Years

Clinical nutrition specialists (CNSs) are often confronted with technological, ethical, and legal questions, that is, what can be done technologically, what should be done ethically, and what must be done legally, which conflict at times. The conflict represents a "troubling trichotomy" as discussed in the lead article of this issue of Nutrition in Clinical Practice (NCP). During Clinical Nutrition Week in 2006, a symposium covering these 3 topics was presented, and later that year, an article covering the same topic was published in NCP In this article, we revisit several legal questions/issues that were raised 10 years ago and discuss current answers and approaches. Some of the answers remain unchanged. Other answers have been modified by additional legislation, court decisions, or regulations. In addition, new questions/issues have arisen. Some of the most common questions regarding nutrition support involve the following: liability, informed consent, medical decisional incapacity vs legal competence, advance directive specificity, surrogate decision making, physician orders for life-sustaining treatment and electronic medical orders for life-sustaining treatment, legal definition of death, patient vs family decision making, the noncompliant patient, and elder abuse obligations. In the current healthcare environment, these questions and issues are best addressed via a transdisciplinary team that focuses on function rather than form. The CNS can play a pivotal role in dealing with these challenges by applying the acronym ACT: being Accountable and Communicating with all stakeholders while actively participating as an integral part of the transdisciplinary Team.

The Troubling Trichotomy 10 Years Later: Where Are We Now?

A decade ago, "Nutrition Support and The Troubling Trichotomy: A Call To Action" was published in this journal, identifying existing conflicts among technological, ethical, and legal aspects of nutrition support therapy, particularly in terminal or end-of-life situations. Over the past 10 years, the American Society for Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition and others have responded to the action call. A "state of the trichotomy" reveals that while much has been achieved, differences in all 3 aspects will continue to exist due to their dynamic and ever-changing states. The technology arena has made it possible to increase the delivery of nutrition support in alternative settings with the use of telemedicine and social media. Critical/crucial conversations and earlier declarations of individual wishes for care and treatment while having decision-making capacity have been enhanced with the focus on patient-centered and family-centered care. The definition of death as brain death has been challenged in at least one instance. Conflicts between the state's interests and the individual's interests have added to recent legal controversies. Notwithstanding the progress made over the past 10 years, several challenges remain. The future challenges presented by the Troubling Trichotomy can be best confronted if we ACT-Accountability, Communication, and Teamwork. The focus of teamwork should move from multidisciplinary and interdisciplinary teams to transdisciplinary teams, reflecting the shift to function rather than form presented by the new healthcare environment. The transdisciplinary team will be able address the opportunities of the Troubling Trichotomy in the next decade by incorporating the 12 Cs, as detailed in the article.