Description
see attached group project only need certain part done.
Unformatted Attachment Preview
Purchase answer to see full attachment
Explanation & Answer
It has been great working with you right from the start to the end. I wish you all the best in your academics. Feel free to ask me any question in the future.
Running head: LEGAL MALPRACTICE CASE
Legal Malpractice Case
Student Name
Course No
Instructor
Submission Date
LEGAL MALPRACTICE CASE
1
Legal malpractice case
Introduction
Yolanda was hospitalized for anal cancer that required her to take medication via an
infusion pump. At the time of her hospitalization, the hospital was testing a new drip pump
system called safe-infuse, as such, the nurses were not very knowledgeable about how to handle
and operate the new pump. Consequently, Yolanda suffered necrosis and had to undergo further
surgical procedures. The malpractice at Caring Memorial Hospital left Yolanda with jarring scars
and a hand that had lost some of its functionality. This paper assesses the case in depth with the
aim of discerning who was in the wrong.
Defenses of the parties
In Yolanda’s case, the primary nurse assigned to take care of her wounds was Jeffery
Chambers; thus, Chambers is to assume most of the liability for the malpractice that led to the
patient developing necrosis and needing graft surgery to fix the problem. According to the
American nurses association, all nurses have a responsibility to care for their patient after
carefully assessing the risks and the responsibility (American Nurses Association, 2015). The
fact that Jeffrey had worked a double shift prior to handling Ms. Yolanda may have
compromised his decision-making process due to fatigue. The American nurses association
further states that all nurses and employed in a healthcare organization have a shared
responsibility for mitigating the effects of fatigue (American Nurses Association, 2014). Jeffery
can use the nurse association policy as his defense by arguing that the hospital should have
stepped in to prevent him from working while fatigued; thus, the hospital is just as liable as he is
in Yolanda's case.
LEGAL MALPRACTICE CASE
2
Another liable party is Carol Price, who neglected to attend to the IV pump and failed to
report that there was an anomaly in the behavior of the pump. Carol’s actions contravened article
139 of New York state education laws, which require all licensed practical nurses to work under
the supervision of a registered nurse at all, times, this means that Carol should not have
administered the IV pump alone (Education Law, 2010). Carol can use the law as her defense
claiming that the hospital let her attend to the patient without any supervision and her limited
experience prevented her from discerning any problem with the operation of the pump.
Diana Smith, a registered nurse, is also accountable. Smith observed the beeping IV
p...