Menu

Legal homework 3B

0 Comment

Two is the principle of beneficence. This principle aims to engage in numerous beneficial activities as possible. Beneficence holds that health experts should attempt to benefit the sick. Therefore, in this case, it is presumed that the duty of the nurse is prevent any situation which may pose a threat to Judy, for example, not leaving the bathroom door open. Third is the principle of non-maleficence which entails preventing or minimizing harm (Armstrong, 2007). The hospital takes the precaution of checking on Judy after every fifteen minutes. This is aimed at preventing or minimizing harm to Judy. The nurse was not negligent for unlocking the bathroom door and allowing Judy to shower by herself. This is because she established in her expert view it was fitting to unlock the bathroom door so that Judy could take a shower. In a 1996 case involving Busta and the Columbus Hospital Corporation, The Montana Supreme Court upheld the decision and order given by the District Court of the Eighth Judicial District. The court jury established that the negligence of the Columbus Hospital and that of the patient led to the injuries and consequent death of the patient. In this case the nurse was deemed not negligent in the events leading to the death of the patient. …
It was not below the standard of care that the nurse left the bathroom door unlocked when the psychiatrist came to see Judy. The nurse did not see the psychiatrist vacating Judy’s room. In addition, the psychiatrist did not inform the nurse when leaving the room and had left Judy alone. Therefore, there is no way the nurse could go to check on the patient. Also, the nurse observed the standard of care by checking on the patient after fifteen minutes (Armstrong, 2007). There is a greater duty to this patient from an ethical point of view. This is because nurses have a responsibility of making sure that patients capable of suicidal actions are properly dealt with. In addition, nurses have the duty of effectively monitoring and assessing patients and conveying these examinations to all individuals involved in the health care delivery team. Nurses also have a duty of telling the truth (Armstrong, 2007). Patients in danger deserve frankness as to their exposure and manner of intervention. Health experts with significant opinions regarding suicide should refer the patient elsewhere or reveal them. There are several ethical principles which should be taken into account when caring for such a patient. One is the danger to self. Danger to self may incorporate failure to attend to basic requirements, for example, showering, or suicidal attempts or ideation. In numerous fields, information of intention to engage in suicidal activities needs a health care practitioner to act instantly to stop the suicide. Two is consent and involuntary treatment. The health expert should make a decision on whether to hold the patient against his desire (Armstrong, 2007). Holding a patient against his desire may be indispensable