Negligence is common terminology used in the practice of law applicable in instances when reasonable steps of care are not taken by a nurse to salvage a situation that caused unwarranted patient suffering. The standard of care is set by the court of law and may differ from one state to the other. All nurses are supposed to understand the laws that apply to negligence, statutes of limitations, among different rules that apply to any form of tortious acts during their practice. This paper seeks to clearly outline some of the step necessary during active nursing practice and the kind of actions that professional nursing practitioners are supposed to comply with.
Negligence
Negligence in tort represents a failure to exercise care that is anticipated in specific conditions adequately. For instance, a parent who does not provide their children food and educations are considered negligent. The law requires that plaintiffs prove four things when they are presenting a claim. First is the duty in which the defendant has an obligation to the plaintiff. Second is a breach, whereby the defendant has not tended their requirements. Damage as the third element is whereby, as a result of the omission, the plaintiff is likely to suffer or be injured (Goldberg, Sebok & Zipursky, 2016). The fourth element is causation in which the injury on the complainant is a foreseeable ramification of the defendant's omission or act. Defense mechanisms involve defendants negating the claims. For instance, introducing proof they do not owe a duty of care, provided required attention, and did not lead to the plaintiff's damages, among others.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
Statutes of Limitations
Statutes of limitations provided professional nurse-defendants information regarding the time the injury happened and when the case should be filed. An attorney with such information provides an attorney with sufficient details to enable handle the case. Statutes of limitations promote fairness for patients because to ensure they do not forget the exact time of treatment (Pozgar, 2013).
Roles in quasi-intentional Torts
Quasi-intentional torts are classified into two, namely breach of confidentiality and defamation of character. In the former, a nurse can protect patients by releasing the medical reports of a patient to the press. In the latter, nurses inform co-workers that they believe patients have been faithfulness to their spouses. Such is similar to nurse managers’ roles in dispensing their activities as far as quasi-intentional agreements are concerned (Wright, 2017).
Chapter 5
According to the statute of limitations, the nurse should document a nursing assessment of the patients at admission. In this case, the nurse failed to document the admission nursing assessment. This is one essential document that should when instances such as the one indicated in the case study takes place. The patient's attorney can easily win this case by claiming that the nurse received the client much earlier than the stated 5:45 p.m. when the first note on the chart was made. Further, the patient's attorney can then claim that the nurse was negligent in the specified roles, to explain why the medical practitioner did not realize the damaged uterine arteries in the system (Bermingham & Brennan, 2018). A supplemental report of this nature might provide numerous ramifications for the nurse.
Under such circumstances, it is the role of the surgeon to perform a thorough scan of the patient and repair the damaged uterine arteries leading to the problem. The patient should also be checked for other damaged parts that cause blood loss to ensure such a problem does not remain persistent. This is because it is the role of nurses to ensure they dispense standard care to patients. Such a patient should also be included in the medical operations such as deciding the kind of care to receive and the most appropriate time to receive it. In judging this case, several elements will be considered. For instance, the timeframe in which the nurse failed to recognize the problem and what was done about it in the case of recognition (Wright, 2017). This is where negligence tort comes into play. It is the duty of medical practitioners caring for patients to dispense, such with the utmost care, something that did not transpire in the current case. In this case, however, the nurse did not recognize the problem in time and is therefore not negligent.
Chapter 6
There is enormous negligence in taking care of this patient, both ion the case of nurses and the surgeon. To start with, a registered nurse inserting a Foley catheter with an inflatable retention bulb instead of a straight one represents a considerable degree of unprofessionalism. The attending nurse also inflated the bulb while the catheter was in the patient's urethra. This is negligence. Further, it is also negligent of the surgeon leaving instead of supervising the entire process. Damages, in this case, include money to be used by the patient to seek further treatment to solve the problem. The court might consider sending the nurses and surgeon to a court or ask the medical facility to compensate the patient. In awarding damages, the court will evaluate the costs of treating and curing the condition (Best, Barnes & Kahn-Fogel, 2018). The court will also assess the consequences of the state if it might in the foreseeable future lead to any consequences.
The registered nurse (RN) will assume the highest liability since she is the one giving directions here because such people are highly trained to dispense care. The surgeon comes second for not overseeing the entire procedure of their work. Finally, the attending nurse comes third considering that she is receiving instructions. The nurse is liable because as a qualified medical practitioner, the nurse should have asked the RN to remove the catheter from the urethra before inflating the bulb. This is a case of massive negligence of the parties involved (Guido, 2014). Medical practitioners deal with the lives of people directly, and any small mistake can lead to severe problems, such as permanent injury, disability, and death in severe cases.
Chapter 7
There are damages that the surgeons must pay this patient considering they he sustained permanent injuries despite being under the medications suggested. This is because the medical team can, in this case, be termed as negligent for not providing utmost care to their patient. This, however, should not have been the case if the patient did not sustain lifetime injuries. The hospital and another medical facility can only be excluded from such a case if the medical practitioners are private contractors (Pozgar, 2013). In the case the medical team is permanently hired, they must be part and parcel of such lawsuits. On the other hand, the manufacturer, Bovie, is also liable for providing faulty instruments and should pay the most substantial damage. In short, the hospital, surgeons, and the manufacturer of the equipment are responsible for damages.
There are a couple of defenses for the defendants in this case. For instance, the surgeons could argue that they informed the patients of the occurrence of a spark, offered the injuries caused and provided possible treatment options. This means that they did everything within their power to salvage the situation. On the other hand, Bovie manufacturers can defend itself by stating that the instrument has been in use for quite some time at the hospital, and such incidence has never occurred (Guido, 2014). This means that it was the role of doctors to check their instruments of any damages before using them. In awarding damages, the court should first check the depth of the injuries caused.
Conclusion
Nursing practice requires that all practitioners comply with the standard of practice as stipulated by their areas of jurisdiction. Knowing what is expected of them will offer the right direction towards the anticipated care they ought to give their respective patient. It, therefore, requires them to understand quasi-intentional torts, statutes of limitation, and the kind of actions taken should damages be leveled against them for a claim of negligence during their practice. Standard of care is the standard to which a reference will be made when nurses are accused of negligence. It is, therefore, imperative that they observe the law as per the book.
References
Bermingham, V., & Brennan, C. (2018). Tort law directions . Oxford University Press.
Best, A., Barnes, D. W., & Kahn-Fogel, N. (2018). Basic tort law: cases, statutes, and problems . Wolters Kluwer Law & Business.
Goldberg, J. C., Sebok, A. J., & Zipursky, B. C. (2016). Tort Law: Responsibilities and Redress . Aspen Publishers.
Guido, G. W. (2014). Legal and ethical issues in nursing (6th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Pozgar, G. D. (2013). Legal and ethical issues for health professionals (3rd ed.). Boston: Jones and Bartlett.
Wright, J. (2017). Tort law and human rights . Bloomsbury Publishing.
