Do not resuscitate (DNR) orders are legally separate from advance directives.

The client's spouse: While the spouse may be a close family member and have significant input into the client's medical decisions, the ultimate authority for decisions like a DNR order rests with the client, assuming they are competent to make their own decisions.

The client's only child: Similar to the spouse, a child can have an emotional and supportive role in the decision-making process, but unless legally designated as the healthcare proxy or power of attorney for healthcare decisions, they do not typically have the legal authority to make decisions for a competent adult.

The client: In the context of medical decision-making, the principle of patient autonomy is fundamental. If the client is competent and capable of making decisions, their wishes and consent are paramount. In the case of a DNR order, it should be discussed thoroughly with the client, ensuring they understand the implications, risks, and benefits before making an informed decision.

Any close blood-related relative: In general, the authority to make medical decisions, including DNR orders, is not automatically granted to any blood-related relative. The client or their legally appointed representative (such as a healthcare proxy) usually holds this authority.

What the facility states should have been done in that situation:
Facilities have their own policies and procedures that guide the staff. While these are important for ensuring consistent care and safety, they might not always align perfectly with the evolving standards of practice or individual patient needs. Legal standards are more broadly based on what is reasonable and prudent in the specific situation.

What the public expectations of what is to be done in the same situation:
Public expectations might vary widely and can be influenced by individual beliefs, cultural factors, or misconceptions. Legal standards are established by the profession and are based on specialized knowledge and training, ensuring that they reflect the best practices and evidence-based care.

What a reasonable and prudent nurse would have done in the same situation:
This is the key standard in legal contexts, known as the standard of care. It means evaluating the nurse's actions against what a hypothetical, reasonably competent nurse with similar training and experience would have done under similar circumstances. This standard is based on professional expertise, current evidence, and the specific needs of the patient, making it the most relevant and fair measure in cases of professional negligence.

What the general practice of colleagues at the time, in the same situation:
While professional norms and guidelines do consider the practices of colleagues, they also leave room for individual judgment and critical thinking. Just because a practice is common among colleagues does not necessarily mean it meets the standard of care. The legal standard considers what a reasonably prudent nurse would have done, which may involve a more careful evaluation of the situation than simply following common practice.