Ads
related to: negligence cases in nursing practice articles
Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Bolam v Friern Hospital Management Committee [1957] 1 WLR 582 is an English tort law case that lays down the typical rule for assessing the appropriate standard of reasonable care in negligence cases involving skilled professionals such as doctors. This rule is known as the Bolam test, and states that if a doctor reaches the standard of a ...
Bolitho v. City and Hackney Health Authority [1996] 4 All ER 771 is an important English tort law case, on the standard of care required by medical specialists. It follows the Bolam test for professional negligence, and addresses the interaction with the concept of causation.
Likewise, damage can occur without negligence, for example, when someone dies from a fatal disease. In cases involving suicide, physicians and particularly psychiatrists may be to a different standard than other defendants in a tort claim. In most tort cases, suicide is legally viewed as an act which terminates a chain of causality.
The negligence might arise from errors in diagnosis, treatment, aftercare or health management. An act of medical malpractice usually has three characteristics. Firstly, it must be proven that the treatment has not been consistent with the standard of care , which is the standard medical treatment accepted and recognized by the profession.
In July 2021, the nursing board revoked Vaught's license and fined her $3,000. During her testimony, she took responsibility for the error, but also described procedural issues at the hospital. "Overriding was something we did as a part of our practice every day. You couldn't get a bag of fluids for a patient without using an override function."
The claimant was a woman of small stature and a diabetic under the care of a doctor during her pregnancy and labour. [2] The doctor did not inform her of the 9-10% risk of shoulder dystocia, where the baby's shoulders are unable to pass through the pelvis among diabetic women as she viewed the problem being very slight and believed a caesarean section was not in the claimant's interest.
The court stated that the nurses’ actions were consistent with basic professional standards of practice for medical-surgical nurses in an acute care hospital. They did not have nor were they expected to have specialized psychiatric nursing training and would not be judged as though they did. [2]
Nursing in Practice produces conferences covering a variety of clinical and policy issues in cities including London, Glasgow, and Belfast. Its events are endorsed by professional bodies including the Royal College of General Practitioners, the Queen's Nursing Institute, and Unite the Union, and have been accredited by the Royal College of Nursing's Accreditation unit.
Ads
related to: negligence cases in nursing practice articles