Jacob Negligence Case

Is this a case when the physician should be called to the telephone because of the threat of an impending suit?

Husband and wife, Gary and Renna Pehle were infected with HIV at the time they applied for life insurance with Farm Bureau Life Insurance Company. The couple did not know they were infected with HIV at the time. The insurance company ran blood tests from the Pehles. The Pehles then signed a contract form which was given to them by a Farm Bureau agent. A nurse from Farm Bureau watched as the Pehles signed the contract. Blood samples were sent to a third-party laboratory called LabOne. Farm Bureau then sent a notice to the Pehles rejecting them from their life insurance policy, which advised the couple that if they wished to have their application reviewed to contact their physician. The Pehles did not take any action in doing so. Two years past and Renna Pehle is confirmed to have AIDS. The Pehles then sues Farm Bureau, LabOne, and LabOne’s medical director Dr. J. Alexander Lowden for negligence, for failing to tell them they were HIV-positive.

The plaintiff Yolanda Pinnelas has evidence of a documented necrotic tissue injury that resulted from a Mitomycin infiltration that was not appropriately monitored on the night in question. There is no documentation that would support adequate monitoring up to the point of the infiltration. However, there is evidence proving that there was a nursing staff shortage on a unit with a high census of sick patients. The defense could claim that Jeffery Chambers did not have adequate rest and his fatigue contributed to the inadequate monitoring of Yolanda Pinnelas. I major defense for the plaintiff is if it is not charted it did not happen. The documentation in this case study does not paint a clear picture of events that took place and leave

The facts of this case are that Dr. Guiles who is self-conscious of his prostate cancer diagnosis is treated horrendously when he finally decides to have surgery ( Buchbinder, Shanks & Buchbinder, 2014). Considering that Dr. Guiles is already sensitive about his condition, his unbearable symptoms are not helping matters (Buchbinder et al, 2014). Upon arrival at the hospital, he is treated subpar. The admitting clerk is rude and unbecoming to a patient who isn’t feeling well and who is embarrassed about his sickness (Buchbinder et al., 2014). To make matters worse, he has to find his own way up to the floor by walking, which causes him to be even later in checking in because of the need to stop frequently to urinate as well as having difficulty in walking (Buchbinder et al., 2014). Once he arrives on the floor, the charge nurse is not welcoming and unprofessional (Buchbinder et al., 2014). After figuring out what to do with the paperwork; and the nurse aide delivers Dr. Guiles to his room, the nurse aide does not offer to help settle him in (Buchbinder et al., 2014). Therefore, Dr. Guiles is faced with battling obnoxious family members who are on his bed and to make matters worse someone is in the bathroom which doesn’t help his need of having to frequently urinate (Buchbinder et al., 2014). When the issues are brought up to the charge nurse, the charge nurse accuses Dr. Guiles of wanting preferential treatment

This proceeding before a Medical Review Panel, pursuant to La. Rev. Stat. §§ 40:1299.41, et seq., is brought by Jimmy Martinez against multiple health care providers, including Dr. Mark Kappelman, a qualified health care provider entitled to have the claim filed against him reviewed by this Panel. The claims made against Dr. Kappelman are mere allegations without support and proof. In a medical malpractice case the burden of proof is on the claimant to establish that Dr. Mark Kappelman’s actions in this matter fell below the standard of care required of similar health care providers. The claimant also bears the burden of proving whether any such alleged act or acts of negligence caused any injuries. It is the duty of the

As healthcare cost, rapidly increase, healthcare professionals are finding innovative ways to contain cost. Occasionally, the healthcare organization may find themselves entombed in an ethical decision and find it difficult to take the appropriate action. In this paper, I will analyze the case study of Dr. S. and Dr. V.; and deliberate how the actions of Dr. S. and Dr. V. violated the Stark Law.

Events surround a recent total knee replacement surgical case performed by Dr. Smith may place the institution at risk for multiple tort claims. These claims involve the violation of operating room procedures and protocols, a post-operative medication errors, and an incident concerning the interaction between a member of the nursing staff and the patient.

Second, ethically committed is aware and consciously of a decision’s ethical aspect. Third, ethically competent is knowledge and understand to make ethically decision. Forth, ethically courageous is not accept with enthusiasm or endorsement. Fifth, ethically consistent is maintain ethical standard, accommodate and justify an action. Sixth, ethically candid is open the complexity conflicting values. As the case, there is not enough doctor and nurse to provide the treatment till the patient got the damage. The ethics should be considered is promoting unrealistic expectation, rationalizing inappropriate or incompetent behavior, failing to acknowledge mistakes. Promoting unrealistic expectations is unintentionally creates in the public that it can do more than it can deliver. Hofmann said “it was better to underpromise and overdeliver”. According to the case, the hospital could not deliver the services good enough to the patient. Rationalizing inappropriate or incompetent behavior is the staff who has inappropriate behaviors. Failing to acknowledge mistakes is the mistakes happening, the doctor should let the patient or his family knowing the mistakes and fix the situation in the next time, and the manager fells guilty because he is the leader, and take care the mistake. As the case, the leader in hospital should let the patient and the family knowing the problem or mistake happening.

Andrew Beckett is a successful Lawyer in Philadelphia, the company that he is a senior associate for is the largest corporate law firm in the state. The company trusted him with their largest and most crucial case. Mr. Beckett abilities were never questioned, but what was questioned was his personal life. Andrew kept his private life as private as possible which included the fact that he was a homosexual that was living with AIDS. As a part of having AIDS Beckett had lesions that stated to noticeably appear; in attempts to hide these lesions from his bosses he tried wearing cover up on top of the marks and when that did not work he claimed that he was taking days off to work from home. Due to other complications with his symptoms he is rushed to the hospital, while he is in the hospital vital documents cannot be found. There seem to be zero copies that could be found in the office, however Beckett was able to get a copy from home presented to the court at the last possible second. Yes, this was stressful nevertheless no damage

A second issue is malpractice. Malpractice issues are always present in an unstable environment where patients will seek to remedy an incident if they feel they have been harmed (Hamric, 2009). It is important to always act in a reasonable way as a health care clinician but unfortunately there are always those who are negligent in their actions as practitioners.

Medical ethics and legal issues have been a key topic in medical field for many years now. It is important for medical professionals to understand the importance of the way we care for patients, it is therefore important to be knowledgeable and aware of the medical ethics and legal issues that govern good patient care. Health care professionals must make decisions based on ethical and legal issues to performance their regular duties. However, Medical ethics is not only about avoiding harm to patients. It is rather a norms, values and principles (Ethical theories 2015). Therefore norms, values and principles are intended to govern medical ethical conduct. Ethics is defined as “a standard of behaviour and a concept of right and wrong beyond what the legal consideration is in any given situation”. In another words medical ethics is a discipline that used to handle moral problems coming out the care of patients. Law is another important discipline that often comes together with medical ethics. Law defined as a “rule of conduct or action prescribed or formally recognized as binding or enforced by a controlling authority”. Government imply law to keep the society running smoothly and to control behaviour that could threaten public safety. Medical professionals have to often prioritise these terms before making any clinical decision. The following findings will constructively emphasise on medical ethics, its

This case is extremely relevant to what is known as the four D’s of negligence; duty, dereliction, direct cause and damages. Duty is when a doctor and a patient have formed a relationship and said doctor has taken on the responsibility of taking care of the patient. Dereliction or failure to perform a duty, there must be some kind of proof that the doctor somehow neglected the doctor neglected the patient. Direct cause, there must be some kind of proof that what happened to the patient was a direct cause of how the doctor conducted himself or his failure to act which resulted in injury. Damages a patient must prove that harm was incurred by the direct result of the physicians actions.

Solicitors are experts in their field. Like all professionals, solicitors must provide accurate information. If the information causes harm, the solicitor could face a negligence claim. All professionals should purchase liability insurance. Professional indemnity insurance offers protection from civil liability claims. Most liability claims are the result of professional negligence.

The negligence of this incident had a negative impact on the patient’s family members. Approximately 25% of cases involving medical negligence involve poor nursing care. Another negative aspect was patient’s family follow up was poor resulting in lack of importance highlighted on the pressure wounds. Ashley (2003) states nurses can be sued for malpractice, this means he or she is being sued for “negligence”. Furthermore, the nursing health professionals can lose its credibility among a community as they failed to provide a holistic care for the patient. However, a positive outcome was nurses were able to reflect among this evidence based practice to assist in better quality in patient

On this date worker visited the residence of Mr. Danny Phillips, for the purpose of monitoring his environment. When worker arrived, Mr. Phillips was in bed. He was dressed appropriately but had on dirty clothing and poor hygiene. Worker and Mr. Phillips talked about possible nursing home placement and Mr. Phillips stated he was not interested in going into a nursing home. Mr. Phillips stated his sister takes care of him. Worker noticed some antibiotic cream lying on the table beside Mr. Phillips. According to Mr. Phillips, he has a small sore on his bottom but he is able to doctor the sore and it is getting better. Worker tried to get Mr. Phillips to go to the ER and have the wound evaluated but Mr. Phillips refused. Worker informed Mr. Phillips