Abstract
Early on, geriatricians in Israel viewed with increasing alarm the spread of COVID‐19. It was clear that this viral disease exhibited a clear predilection for and danger to older persons. Informal contacts began with senior officials from the country’s Ministry of Health, the Israel Medical Association and the country’s largest Health Fund; this in order to plan an approach to the possible coming storm. A group was formed, comprising three senior geriatricians, a former dean, palliative care specialist and a lawyer/ethicist. The members made every effort to ensure that its recommendations would be practical while at the same time taking into account the tenets of medical ethics. The committee’s main task was to think through a workable approach were ICU/ventilator resources be far outstripped by those requiring such care. Recommendations included the approach to older persons both in the community and long term care institutions, a triage instrument and palliative care. Patient autonomy was emphasized with a strong recommendation for people of all ages to update their advance directives or if they did not have any, to quickly draw them up. Considering the value of distributive justice, with respect to triage, a “soft utilitarian” approach was advocated with the main criteria being function and co‐morbidity. While chronological age was rejected as a sole criterion, in the case of an overwhelming crisis, “biological age” would enter into the triage considerations; but only in the case of distinguishing between people with equal non‐age related deficits. The guideline emphasized that no matter what, in the spirit of beneficence, anyone who fell ill must receive active palliative care throughout the course of a COVD‐19 infection but especially at the end of life. Furthermore, in the spirit of non‐maleficence, the very frail, old‐old and severely demented would be actively protected from dying on ventilation.
This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.