It's not vastly different in the UK - there was a landmark case about 10 years ago which was based on the fact that the patient and family hadn't been consulted. The patient (in her 60s) had terminal lung cancer and had been admitted after sustaining a cervical fracture in an RTA, so it was a very different set of circumstances.In Sweden, the decision to attempt resuscitation or not lies completely with the medically trained people treating the patient. The patient, or their closest relatives, must be informed but agreement with the decision is not necessary. Also, there's a difference between there 'being risks' and there being a near certainty for a very low quality of life after a resuscitation attempt, which would be the case here.
Essentially, the fact that he was asked his opinion on resuscitation doesn't necessarily mean that he actually had a say in the matter. It was more likely asked to gauge whether they would have to explain to the man why they would be going against his wishes or if they were in agreement with regards to the decision that was actually made.
I do think that the way the tweet put it (asked to sign a DNR) comes across as very harsh though.
Obviously, this is based on the legal framework being similar to Sweden's.
I don't know anything about how you approach the medical care of very old people in your country - hopefully it's better than in the UK!