Consensus Summary of Yolanda Pinnelas Case Study The purpose of this paper is to discuss a case study involving a 21-year-old patient, Yolanda Pinnelas, who was studying to be a musical conductor, and who was being treated with chemotherapy. The toxic medication allegedly caused severe deformity of the patient’s hand when it seeped out of the intravenous (IV) catheter and into the surrounding tissues with minimal intervention by the hospital staff noted. This malpractice case will be reviewed thoroughly by each one of the group members and a discussion of the issues relating to duty, documentation, liability, damages and more will be discussed in detail within this paper. Liability Issues/Parties Involved/Who Should Be Sued Liability Issues …show more content…
As such, in the Yolanda Pinnelas case, when the 21-year-old oncology patient who was administered IV Mitomycin to treat her anal cancer and developed necrosis to the hand after. In malpractice cases the burden is on the Plaintiff to prove the four elements of the claim, namely duty, breach, damages and proximate cause. According to Westrick (2014b), the four elements must be proven to arrive at a successful claim. Duty is the responsibility of healthcare provider to treat and care for patients. Breach is a failure in treatment or neglect of care. Damages are injuries which happen because there was breach. Proximate cause is proof that the injury happened because of the …show more content…
In malpractice claims both the employer and the practitioner can be sued. Nurses need to know the different types of insurances and what they cover. Personal liability covers the nurse for representation for State Board actions, volunteer work and high risk areas. Some employers are making personal liability mandatory for employment. Employer liability covers actions of nurses when they are practicing in their scope of practice; nurses need to be aware that these insurances have limitations. More nurses are carrying liability insurance, to cover their practice in the face of increased
The third element of a negligence claim, causation, requires the breach of duty to be the proximate cause of the damages sustained by the plaintiff. Although the lower courts found McGee’s reckless driving to be an intervening act that broke the chain of causation, the intervening-cause rule “does not insulate the defendant if the defendant had reasonable grounds for apprehending that such [an] act [of a third party] would be committed.” Colvin wrote that
I believe it is imperative for Evita to raise suspicion about the cause of Eric’s death as well as the parental competence, Evita needs to make sure that these parents have the ability to raise their children. As a social worker it is Evita’s responsibility to be completely honest about any information she knows in order to ensure that the family is safe as a whole. I believe that Evita needs to raise suspicion to ensure the other two children within the family are safe and the parents are competent to be raising their children. If the Father Bill is in reality babysitting the children drunk, this could have been a major factor as to why the Father didn’t wake up when he rolled on top of Eric. It is obligatory that Envita ensures that the living situation is safe so
Under proximate cause, the cause of the injuries must have been foreseeable by the defendant. For strict liability it would be used because of automatic responsibility without having to prove negligence for damages. This is for the doctor, since he was performing the surgery and caused more problems and pain to Cal. Here in Florida, statue 768.81 for negligence, Medical malpractice (what the doctor did).Notwithstanding anything in law to the contrary, in an action for damages for personal injury or wrongful death arising out of medical malpractice, whether in contract or tort. In a negligence action, the court shall enter judgment against each party liable
As the role of case management becomes apparent so are legal and liability claims. It makes no matter what practice setting a case manager is in they can be held for damages if their actions fall below the normal accepted standards of care and if the patient has a bad outcome. The case manager needs to be aware of the standards of care and document all intervention done. When preparing to case management a client gather information that appropriated health care history from admission to discharge. So, that appropriate plan of care can developed among the health care team to ensure positive outcome for this episode of care.
Marvelin Calcano Suzanne H. Elgendy PSY 370-04 4 May 2018 Psychology In The News Yoselyn Ortega, a US citizen for 10 years who is originally from Santiago de los Caballeros in the Dominican Republic was 50 years old when she murdered Lucia and Leo. She was living on Riverside Drive in Manhattan's Hamilton Heights neighborhood with her 17-year-old son Jesus, her sister, and her niece. She was paid $18-an-hour, as a nanny by Kevin Krim a former a digital content executive at the television network CNBC and Marina Krim who was a former kindergarten teacher.
Actual Causation asks did the CARDWARE and Candie Cardigan actually cause the harm to occur? To decide weather or not CARDWARE and Candie Cardigan the defendant caused brought
Missed identification of shock symptoms in Ms. Gadner 2. IV infiltration being missed resulting in her not receiving fluid ordered 3. “Scanty documentation” depriving the physician of information on Ms. Gadner’s current condition 4. Administration of valium and morphine, contraindicated in shock, nursing not questioning the order 5. Didn’t communicate need for transfer to Dr. Dick.
Russell Turner (Petitioner) brought causes of action against Smith 's Pharmacy (Respondent) for negligence, for failing act with reasonable care by providing prescription labels in large enough print, with knowledge that the Petitioner suffered from vision impairment. The court ruled in favor of Smith 's Pharmacy because Petitioner failed to establish the Respondents proximate cause— when Petitioner took a prescription he was uncertain of. The court held that it was unforeseeable to the pharmacist that the Petitioner would mistakenly take the wrong medication. The court applied the general elements for negligence: proof that a duty existed, the duty was breached, and the breach was the proximate cause of the harm. The question is whether a
Elements of Medical Malpractice In order to prevail in a medical malpractice claim the plaintiff must be able to prove duty, breach causation, and damage. Therefore, if a patient comes in with an injury the physician
This entails exercising care in handling or interacting with others. The plaintiff has the right to demonstrate legally recognizable past, present and future economic, pain and suffering caused by the injuries. The defendant equally has the right to raise several rightful defences to
The area of tort in law is also called negligence it is caused due to carelessness... In Legal position the idea of negligence should exercise reasonable when they act by taking account f that they might foreseeable cause harm to other
A different between criminal law and law of tort is that the main purpose of law of tort is to compensate people who suffer harm and not punish the people who caused this harm, a different between law of tort and contract law is that the law of tort makes as liable to people with whom we have no previuous relationship. “The defendant is in same sese at fault, either because he intends harm or because he take unreasonable risk of harm. As for the breach of contract, it not be considered tort”
[8][9] Simply professional malpractice is breaching the duty of care by professional and it liable to happen injuries to the client. Obligation vs. Duty of
The hospital failed to warn the patient of the risk of bone fracture associated with the treatment and did not provide the patient with anything to minimise
The contributory negligence is the most common defense to negligence. It’s when the plaintiff fails to exercise reasonable care for their own protection. This defense results in preventing the plaintiff from recovering any type of reward. Comparative negligence allows the damages to be divided between both the plaintiff and the defendant to their degree of