CM, a 55-year-old man with severe congenital disabilities and Type 2 Diabetes, died from diabetic ketoacidosis while residing in a disability support facility. In the week preceding death, he experienced reduced appetite, vomiting, and elevated blood glucose levels despite diminished oral intake. ED assessments on 16-17 January advised monitoring. A telehealth consultation on 21-22 January revealed the family declined medical investigation, intravenous fluids, nasogastric/PEG feeding, and medications. CM's condition deteriorated with weakness, lethargy, and shallow breathing. The coroner found the medical care provided by the facility, GP, and ED was reasonable. No causal nexus existed between CM's 'in care' status and his death. Clinical lesson: earlier recognition of DKA signs (elevated glucose with vomiting and lethargy despite reduced intake) and consideration of assertive metabolic intervention, even when families decline full investigation, might have altered outcomes. The case highlights tension between respecting advance wishes and recognising acute metabolic decompensation.
AI-generated summary and tagging — may contain inaccuracies; refer to original finding for legal purposes. Report an inaccuracy.
Specialties
general practiceemergency medicineneurologyforensic medicine
Error types
diagnostic
Drugs involved
levetiracetammetforminolanzapine
Clinical conditions
type 2 diabetes mellitusdiabetic ketoacidosisepilepsysevere congenital disabilitiesseizures
Contributing factors
Reduced oral intake
Persistently elevated blood glucose levels
Vomiting
Family refusal of medical investigation and intravenous fluids
This page reproduces or summarises information from publicly available findings published by Australian coroners' courts. Coronial is an independent educational resource and is not affiliated with, endorsed by, or acting on behalf of any coronial court or government body.
Content may be incomplete, reformatted, or summarised. Some material may have been redacted or restricted by court order or privacy requirements. Always refer to the original court publication for the authoritative record.
Copyright in original materials remains with the relevant government jurisdiction. AI-generated summaries and tagging are for educational purposes only, may contain inaccuracies, and must not be treated as legal documents. We welcome feedback for correction — report an inaccuracy here.