Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Introduction to negligence
Introduction to negligence
Introduction to negligence
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Introduction to negligence
1) What has your experience been thus far with the legal system? In your opinion, why is it important for students entering medical fields to be familiar with the legal system and how it works? My experience working within the legal system, from a medical prospective, has been limited to the rules, regulations, and policies of the Department of Defense (DoD). Traditional DoD medics work under the license of a medical officer, operate under established protocols, an receive leniency or restriction of medical practices in accordance with medical control (the medical officer responsible for unit medics). DoD medics maybe granted authorities to work on the civilian populous or limited to DoD members/service members. Students of medicine must be aware of the governing laws and policies within their respective scope of practice. Intimate knowledge of the applicable laws and policies governing the learning medical practitioner protects both the student (both in training and in the professional workforce) as well as future patients. Laws and policies are created out of necessity, regrettably often after unfortunate events occurred. Students of medicine must respect this notion, and apply the gravity of their …show more content…
Please describe each of the elements needed to be proven for a successful negligence suit? Using your career choice in the health care arena, describe to me a scenario where there is strong possibility that negligence …show more content…
The distributive justice principle requires that all persons be treated equally and fairly and that no one person should get a disproportional share of society's resources or benefits. In your opinion, are current resources and benefits distributed disproportionally? Explain why you feel this way. Give an example from your profession that supports your belief. How would you suggest this be
Learning from what Dr. Anna Pou had to face with the lawsuits she was dealing with makes me cringe. As Healthcare professionals, having to worry of possibly being sued for believing what is right for the patient or as a whole for the hospitals health is ridiculous. Healthcare professionals like Dr. Pou, have taken the Hippocratic oath, and one of the promises made within that oath is “first, do no harm”. Often time’s society look at courts cases as a battle versus two oppositions, but Dr. Pou’s case it is not. In her statements from national television she states saying her role was to ‘‘help’’ patients ‘‘through their pain,’’.
A dentist fits several children with braces. The children are regular patients of the dentist. The results for some of the patients turn out to be unacceptable and damaging. There are children who have developed gum infections due to improperly tightened braces. Some mistakenly had their permanent teeth removed, while others have misaligned bites. A local attorney becomes aware of these incidences, looks further into it, and realizes the dentist has not been properly trained and holds no legal license to practice dentistry or orthodontics. The attorney decides to act on behalf of the displeased patients and files a class action lawsuit. The attorney plans to prove the dentist negligent and guilty of dental malpractice by providing proof using the four D’s of negligence. The four D’s of negligence are duty, dereliction, direct cause and damages.
To succeed in a negligence action, you must prove each of the following. The first element, did George owe the plaintiff a legal duty of care? Legal duty of care paradigm includes that a person acts towards others with attention, prudence, and caution. George owed a duty of care to people by leaving his car in park.
Proximate Cause: The shoulder and rotator cuff injuries were within the scope of the risks that made us determine that the dropping of Vicky’s body was a breach. Because Dwayne dropped Vicky, Dwayne’s dropping of Vicky’s body proximately caused the injuries sustained. Felix’s carrying of the body was a cause in fact but not the proximate cause of the injuries Vicky
In order to prove a negligence case the plaintiff must prove four things: (1) duty - that the defendant owed
Medical malpractice lawsuits are an extremely serious topic and have affected numerous patients, doctors, and hospitals across the country. Medical malpractice is defined as “improper, unskilled or negligent treatment of a patient by a physician, dentist, nurse, pharmacist, or other health care professional” (Medical malpractice, n.d.). If a doctor acts negligent and causes harm to a patient, malpractice lawsuits arise. Negligence is the concept of the liability concerning claims of medical malpractice, making this type of litigation part of tort law. Tort law provides that one person may litigate negligence to recover damages for personal injury. Negligence laws are designed to deter careless behavior and also to compensate victims for any negligence.
Forrester, K., & Griffiths, D. (2010). Essentials of law for health professionals. Sydney: Mosby Elsevier. Retrieved from Google Books.
Before there can be a nursing malpractice case, the plaintiff must prove certain legal elements. These elements include: 1) duty of care: the defendant nurse had a duty of care toward the plaintiff; 2) breached of duty: that the defendant breached that duty, usually by acting negligently or carelessly; 3) causation: that the injury would not have happened if the
Wealth inequality relates to race, gender, and access to health care as there are many wealth and income disparities among these groups of individuals. Justice, efficiency and liberty are the primary moral values when discussing economics and ethics. For example, a free-market system can be efficient because it creates maximizing profits, but can be immoral if it impedes on the liberties of individuals in a society. An economic system that produces an equal distribution of wealth, however, can be immoral as well, if it restricts liberties. Distributive justice, is a term used to describe how goods are apportioned among individuals. There are two fundamental types of distributive justice interpreted by philosophers; procedural justice and end-state distributive justice.
Distributive justice can be described as how goods are allocated in a socially just way in society. There are many different principles of distribution including egalitarian and prioritarian. In this essay I will explain in depth the views of the egalitarian and prioritarian whilst assessing their strengths and weaknesses. I will then go on to conclude that the egalitarian principle of distribution, specifically telic egalitarianism is a more effective theory than the prioritarian principle as although the levelling down objection poses a significant threat to the more extreme forms of egalitarianism, telic egalitarianism is able to overcome the claim that levelling down would not be beneficial in all cases. In extreme egalitarianism cases, it seems as though helping the people most in need would be preferable to levelling everyone down to a worse level, but it can be shown that in many examples this is not the case as levelling down would be better for everyone involved.
According to an online article, Distributive Justice, written by Michelle Maiese, distributive justice tries focusing on evenly distributing the community resources. Maiese goes on in her article saying that, to have an equal amount of goods to go to everyone, how to you know what the fair amount is. There are programs put into place that help determine the amount of goods each family can get. An example that relates to myself and may others, are programs such as T.A.P and FASFA. Are they fair when handing out aid to students? I sometimes question it. I know people who are living with their parents, who have jobs that are well off. Those students I know have gotten way more “Free” money (grants, TAP) than I have. I personally, don’t live with my parents, work barely twenty six hours a week to go to school, and living with my husband who makes ok money, but we are far from rich. Yet, I can get approved for loans, but I get crap in “free” money. I also have worked my butt off for school, with A’s for almost every class, while the person who plays on his phone all day, and barley passes gets a lot more “Free” money than I do. Is this fair distribution? I think not, the system that we have place for check and balances are a part of the reason we have poor people. Programs such as WIC (women, Infants and Children), they try to help those who haven’t been given fair distribution , however they too have standards that you must fall under to get any sort of help. For these reason, I believe that’s what can cause people to be poor. They either make just a few hundred dollar more than the cut off amount, so they can’t get the help they need, which then leads to them struggling. Also maybe they know that if they don’t work they could get help from all these different types of programs, so they stay job less, because that works out better for them than keeping a
Distributive justice refers to the social issue of how resources will be dispersed amid members of society. For distributive justice to be achieved, it is essential for commodities to be allocated equitably. The question arises of who gets what and should government intervene in this process? Everyone has their own opinion of how resources should be distributed. In the society we live in you need resources to get ahead and unfortunately those who have wealth attain better access to such resources.
The Distributive Justice System is known as the “fair share” (Maiese 1). What it means is that it revolves around equity, equality, and need. Equity means that one’s reward should amount to one’s contribution to society. You settle for what you accomplish rather than settling for something less than the work you have completed. Equality is when everyone receives the same amount of reward no matter how much or how little you have accomplished. It benefits those who work less but not to those who contribute the most. Need is unlike the others, no matter how much work you have accomplished, the one’s that require it the most shall receive the reward. Needless to say, you bust your
One public laws affect this clinical practice would be the law labeled No Child Left Behind Act of 2001. This law addresses how schools in each state are held liable for test scores for mathematics and reading skills. In regards to this, several events were sent to court.
Distributive is the perceived fairness of how resources and reward are distributed throughout an organization. According to Dean B. McFarlin and Paul D. Sweeney that “Distributive justice was found to be a more important predictor of two personal outcomes, pay satisfaction and job satisfaction.”