Application of Law and Ethics
Assignment Section one: Patient safety
In a chapter provided for you on DIRECT (see study desk for NUR3020), McDonald and Then discuss that while individuals can make errors, an error can also be a consequence of the complexity of the system in which it occurred (McDonald & Then, 2014, p. 134).
a) Conduct an analysis of the events that are outlined by the coroner in the Inquest into the death of Marcia Joy Loveday 1 in terms of the nurses involved and considering the statement above.
a. Use reading and additional references to assist your critique (at least three for each section)
b. Your conclusion might tie-in some of the recommendations from the inquest if they relate to what you have covered in your essay.
c. Approx. 800 words (flexible – the overall assign is 2000 words)
b) The decision by the coroner in the case and by Mrs Loveday’s next of kin was that no individual or organisation should be put forward for further investigation.
If the findings had been different and the coroner determined that Mrs Loveday died because of a cardiac arrest suffered after an anaphylactic reaction to IV Ampicillin, is it possible that criminal proceeding could occur against some of the personnel involved?
Explain how the tort of negligence would be applied to a nurse involved in this alternate scenario and outline the elements which would need to be proved in relation to this case in order to advance a successful claim for negligence
a. Use reading and additional references to assist your critique (at least three)
b. Approx. 500-600 words (flexible – the overall assign is 2000words)
Assignment: Section two: Person-centred care: Ethics
c) Critique the actions of the nurses and the facility in the situation below using principles of ethics and considering patients’ rights. Utilize published academic texts and literature to assist your critique.
(approx. 600 words)
Scenario: Mr Griggs is spending three weeks in a Respite care centre while his wife is interstate visiting relatives. He requires care mainly because of his lack of mobility – he has gait and balance difficulties and cannot walk unassisted although he can weight bear and stand. His daughter visits him in the morning to find him in extreme distress. He states that he cannot find his teeth. He woke up at 1 am and searched the bed, the bedside table top, his bed clothes and anywhere he could reach. He said that all he could think of was that the teeth were on the floor somewhere. Concluding this, he says he did not sleep the rest of the night because he was so fearful that someone would come in and step on his teeth and break them. The daughter picked the buzzer up from the floor (where it had been all night) and asked her father to ring for the nurse.
The nurse showed Mr Griggs and his daughter that the teeth were in the drawer of the bedside cabinet and Mr Griggs put his dentures back in place. The daughter asked what happened and the nurse said that the night nurse would have taken Mr Gregg’s teeth out because it is the institution’s policy so that residents do not ‘choke on their teeth’.
The daughter and Mr Griggs said that he has never choked on his teeth in his life (he is 92) and they requested the dentures to be left in the next night and for the rest of his stay. The nurse said this was not possible because it was the ‘policy’.
The daughter followed the nurse out and added that she had come in to find her father in an extremely distressed state because he was so worried and because he had not slept since 1 am. She also asked the nurse about the frequency of any staff checking on him because he said no one came in the whole time he was awake and his buzzer was on the floor. The nurse said she found it hard to believe that he would stay awake all night because he is 92.