Navigating Legal and Ethical Standards in Healthcare: A Case Study Analysis
The legal and ethical parameters set out do dictate their involvement, but not to the detriment of the patient. For instance, the case of Good Samaritan Home reveals how difficult it is to meet these standards and therefore how even professional healthcare workers sometimes make famou blunders. This paper looks at the intentional torts, undue neglect, and the doctrine of having a superior speak for the servant, as well as summary approaches and the evidence from reduced suits of malpractice within theMedicare.
Intentional Torts in Healthcare
The most widely recognized example of intentional torts is the point at which an individual deliberately hurts another individual. In healthcare settings, several intentional torts can occur: In healthcare settings, several intentional torts can happen:
Assault:
Asphyxiation entails the impression of threat and the chance of harmful or offensive contact by an offensive other, producing anxiety and fear. For example, an attendant who might give medication involuntarily to the patient would place themselves under the scrutiny of abuse in healthcare (Kaldjian, 2024).
Battery:
Battery is committed in the case of foreseeable and unconsented physical contact that entails intimidation or injury of others. A given example is when a clinician endorses medicine without appropriate permission or the assigned authority, which is the act of battery.
False Imprisonment:
As with some constructions, the term illegal confinement is recommended as a scenario where one’s ability to move freely is restrained without due cause. Within a medical setting, this could be done through the unlawful detention of a patient in a restrictive setting without his consent and devoid of any medical justification.
Defamation: Defamation consists, as perhaps is best known, in making severe false statements against people and causing that untruth to gain root amongst a large population. There are all kinds of treatment that bearing professionals may use and in case of any injury, the appropriate form of action to take against them is slandering or libeling a patient who they obtained undue advantage from.
Potential Intentional Torts in the Good Samaritan Case
Nurses working in the Good Samaritan Ward could, intentionally, have committed a few torts. For example, Capture a patient without informed consent, or perform surgery, so called professionals, could suffer legal consequences of battery and false imprisonment (Hodge & Hubbard, 2020). On the other side, assuming someone engages in socially substandard practices such as gossiping about colleagues or patients, could also be legally challenged with the defamation offense.
Other aspects of the intentional torts does not only rest with battery and false imprisonment as the “Good Samaritan” case suggests. It is for instance, common to assume that defamation is one other important misdeed which can arise out of other purposeful business conduct. It is however, a matter of ethics and it is possible that nursing aides with ill motives will pour down allegations against a fellow worker or a patient and the consequence is reputational damage. Such harm lifts the trust espoused by the healthcare facility over patients and exit concern for outstanding care and the attitude of personnel towards work.
Intentional Infliction of Distress
The Intentional Insult of Emotional Distress (IIED) also has a shortcoming that can be uncovered in this scenario which is exemplified from the previous example given (Arora, 2022). The nursing aides in particular are singularly and as a group liable for extreme neglect and are engaging in supererogatory activities which causes undue emotional stress to the patients as well as the colleagues in the workplace. Hence, in this instance, the nursing aides would also be liable for the supererogation of emotional distress.
For example, a nurse who robs a patient of sleep for whatever reasons automatically meets the threshold alone. A definition of emotional injury is an injury which arises from an act or acts of a person of a nonphysical nature (Mahyut et al., 2023).
Respondeat Superior and Negligence
The legal idea of respondeat superior has implications for managers as they are vicariously liable for their workers’ acts at work (Luskin, 2020). Ultimately, if the nursing aides were indeed involved in the case of the Good Samaritan, the facility would be in charge of their supervision. Negligence comprises four parts: obligation/obligation, breakchemicalcausationmreparationcasespertaintodefinarialliabilitiesrelatedtocompensation.
The thought of obligation involves healthcare laborers delivering a sanctioned standard of care to the patients. Unduty satisfaction happens if this standard of care is not met, leading to harm or injury. Causation shows here that infringement of obligation judgment amounts to harm caused to the patient, whereas damages calculate the degree of harm or injury.
In the context of the “HS 101 M1 Assignment Ethical Standards in Healthcare,” the concept of Respondent Superior plays a key role, particularly in healthcare settings where the responsibility of nursing aids is crucial. This ethical standard outlines the institution’s obligation to provide adequate supervision and training to ensure that individuals are protected from potential harm. Therefore, in the HS 101 M1 Assignment Ethical Standards in Healthcare, the healthcare facility remains accountable for the actions of its nursing staff and their interactions with patients, making it vital for organizations to uphold high ethical standards.
The public authority nurture assistants’ unprofessional direct in “Good Samaritan” is manifested by the infringement of obligation because they desolate care. The disregard of patients, ill-advised medication administration, and subpar treatment compared to the one expected in healthcare facilities recommend that the trauma center personnel act contrary to the standard of care utilized in the healthcare industry.
This issue, derogation of the obligation, coincided with the injuries sustained by the people in question, encompassing the causation component. Therefore, the term negligence is, seen in this case, a clear indication that there should be better supervision and adherence to professional standards so a superior healthcare facility is availed (Shenoy et al., 2021).
Is the Good Samaritan Case an Example of Negligence?
Indeed, the Good Samaritan case states the doctrine of liable acts. By not adhering to the standards, conventions, and care guidelines appropriately, the nursing aides damaged the occupants. They made some unacceptable moves, for example, taking medications without remedy and inadvertently neglecting the patients, which scorned their obligation of care and led to results that were vulnerable to deterioration.
Ethical Approaches and Decision-Making
Ethics and action cycles focusing on individual choice making processes have an important place, particularly in the field of medicine where ethical dilemmas are a fact of life (Doherty, 2020). Reality in the case of Good Samaritan also involves ethical aspects, some of which are the ‘directions’ given by the nursing aides which were definitely not proper. Besides other ethical models like deficiency focused one that bases ethical models on business character traits, UBI also known as an approach toward an ethical business.
With regard to compliance with moral ideals such as honesty, genuineness, and compassion, these people, in light of that, try to reside and to act. With regard to Good Samaritan Home, the diligence and the human element should be considered. Aiding the shocking misconduct of nursing aides’ actions, one could use these ethics and function based on these ethics.
Integrity and Accountability
Sincerity and Integrity will be the two pillars that will guide the ethos of the health facility It would mean referring the misconduct to the proper officer for action and ensuring that the system is accountable and transparent within the institution (Robert et al.,2020). In addition, from a utilitarian perspective, successful critical thinking can also be derived from more complex matters as a practical approach that evaluates actions based on results.
Now, how one can determine what is ethically correct comes from the challenges of weighing potential actions such as against “doing nothing” or misconduct. The case of Pip is in line with the consequentialist approach to thinking in relation to healthcare decision, which downplays “self-centered” fears and reputations that an institution has to be imagined and focuses largely on patient safety and well-being Having ethical decisions in health care is fundamental. At the end of the day, in relation to the public, something is expected from health care ceivers and, as with any other human set of principles, these need to be true, and action able decisions made (Akdeniz et al., 2021).
Comparing Misfeasance, Malfeasance, and Nonfeasance
The making of appropriately authorized actions is named misfeasance (Akhtar, 2020); then again, unlawful acts occur in malfeasance. Another kind of negligence from a representative point of view is nonfeasance, which generally alludes to the worker’s failure to pay their obligation. Misfeasance in healthcare may be an inappropriate administration of medication; malfeasance could be the falsification of medical records, and nonfeasance – is the negligence on the part of healthcare professionals to provide competent medical care.
Protecting Healthcare Professionals from Malpractice Claims
Healthcare professionals can safeguard themselves from malpractice claims by:
• Maintaining exhaustive documentation of patient care.
• The obtaining of informed consent for plans and procedures.
• Adherence to accepted guidelines and standards of practice.
Conclusion
Negligence, intentional torts, superiors’ command, and decision-making processes are all critical in achieving equity in health care because the responsibility of the health attendant is to leave the patient’s safety and well-being in the hands of the health aid. The example of this Good Samaritan brigade case reminds one of brigade, which has to be followed in strengthening the system to safeguard patients and ensure the wellbeing of health professionals against negligence claims.
In focus of the work of health care workers as primary in their practice, there is a need to adhere to ethical values in a manner that will limit the possibility of undermining the credibility of such practice.
- American Medical Association (AMA). Medical Ethics
https://www.ama-assn.org/delivering-care/ethics
National Institutes of Health (NIH. Legal and Ethical Issues in Healthcare
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5037942/
U.S. Department of Health & Human Services (HHS). HIPAA and Patient Privacy
https://www.hhs.gov/hipaa/index.html
World Health Organization (WHO). Ethical Standards in Healthcare
https://www.who.int/ethics/topics/en/
American Nurses Association (ANA). Code of Ethics for Nurses
https://www.nursingworld.org/practice-policy/nursing-excellence/ethics/code-of-ethics-for-nurses/
Journal of Medical Ethics. Legal and Ethical Issues in Healthcare
https://jme.bmj.com/content/46/1/1