REVISED_Legal Claims and Principles in Medical Negligence and Police Brutality
docx
keyboard_arrow_up
School
Mount Kenya University *
*We aren’t endorsed by this school
Course
MISC
Subject
Law
Date
Nov 24, 2024
Type
docx
Pages
5
Uploaded by DukeBravery11481
Legal Claims and Principles in Medical Negligence and Police Brutality: A Case Analysis
Student’s Name
University Name
1
Negligence in the medical field and police violence are two major problems that can
devastate victims and their loved ones. Hugo was knocked to the ground by police during an
attempted arrest and had a spinal cord injury. Dr Clark, who was supposed to cure his bacterial
illness, botched the prescription, causing even more injury. The paper explores Hugo and
Deanna's legal options, including whether or not Dr Clark or the police officers may be liable for
their actions. To thoroughly understand the legal framework governing medical negligence and
police brutality allegations, this study will draw on key judicial precedents, legislation, and
scholarly literature. This paper aims to shed light on the necessity of holding healthcare providers
and law enforcement personnel responsible for their conduct in cases of medical negligence and
police brutality, as well as to give insights into these topics from a legal perspective.
Hugo
Hugo may have a claim for negligence against Dr Clark for failing to provide appropriate
medical treatment for his bacterial infection. Although Dr Clark's apprehension regarding the
overuse of antibiotics is understandable, his primary obligation was to ensure that Hugo received
optimal medical treatment. The treatment plan proposed by Dr Clark, which involves the
consumption of walnuts, lacks medical evidence and is deemed unsuitable for implementation.
Hugo's permanent paralysis of his right leg resulted from Dr Clark's failure to disclose the
potential risks of walking more than one mile daily. Hugo's potential entitlement to compensation
for the harm he has experienced may be attributed to the alleged negligence of Dr Clark.
12
Hugo may also have a claim for negligence against PC Hap and PC Hazard for their
actions that led to his permanent paralysis. The law enforcement officials endeavored to
1
Knapp TA, Huff RL. Emerging trends in the physician's duty to disclose: an update of Canterbury v. Spence.
Journal of Legal Medicine. (1975) Jan;3(1):31-5.
2
D., Clay, Kelly., Gina, Manguno-Mire. Commentary: Helling v. Carey, Caveat Medicus.. Journal of the
American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law, (2008).;36(3):306-309.
2
apprehend Dodger in a manner that incited a physical altercation, leading to Hugo being
forcefully propelled to the ground and sustaining injuries. The law mandates that law
enforcement officials exercise reasonable care while attempting to apprehend a suspect. Their
conduct in this particular instance could be deemed negligent. Hugo's potential entitlement to
compensation for the harm he has endured may be attributed to the responsible party's
negligence.
3
Hugo may have a claim for negligence against Dodger for his role in the scuffle that led
to his permanent paralysis. The resistance exhibited by Dodger during the arrest resulted in a
physical altercation that ultimately caused Hugo to be knocked down and sustain injuries.
Dodger was obligated to exercise reasonable care in his interactions with others, including the
police officers and Hugo. Dodger's omission to fulfil this obligation could be deemed as a form
of negligence. Hugo's potential entitlement to compensation for the harm he has incurred may be
attributed to his alleged negligence
4
.
Deanna
To ascertain the presence of a recognized psychiatric ailment, Deanna must furnish
medical proof that she experienced a recognized mental health disorder, such as post-traumatic
stress disorder or depression, consequent to her observation of the accident. The provision of
such evidence necessitates the involvement of a certified healthcare practitioner, such as a
psychiatrist or psychologist.
Second, Deanna would have to show that the police officers or Dr Clark broke a duty of
care they owed her to prove that their carelessness caused her sickness. Regarding the police
3
Zopf MJ. Modest Proposal to Articulate Clearly Established Law on Stops, Tickets, Warnings, and
Searches. InIllinois Law Enforcement Executive Forum (2001) Jul (pp. 83-89).
4
Nolan D, Bailey S. The Page v Smith Saga: A Tale of Inauspicious Origins and Unintended Consequences (2010).
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
- Access to all documents
- Unlimited textbook solutions
- 24/7 expert homework help
3
officers, they may have violated their duty of care by neglecting to exercise reasonable caution to
prevent harm to Hugo and those in his vicinity while performing their duties. Regarding Dr
Clark, he may have violated his duty of care by neglecting to offer suitable medical guidance and
therapy to Hugo, considering the severity of his ailment and the potential hazards linked to the
treatment he recommended
5
.
In conclusion, this paper analyzes the case of Hugo and Deanna to shed light on the legal
claims and principals involved in cases of medical negligence and police brutality. Claims of
assault and battery by police officers and medical negligence by Dr Clark are among those
discussed. It clarifies the legal framework governing such cases and emphasizes the significance
of holding healthcare providers and law enforcement personnel accountable for their actions.
Liability depends on several interrelated factors, such as breach of duty of care and causal
connection. In sum, this paper's analysis shows how crucial responsibility and accountability are
for delivering fair treatment to victims of medical malpractice and police brutality.
5
Ibid
4
Bibliography
D., Clay, Kelly., Gina, Manguno-Mire. Commentary: Helling v. Carey, Caveat Medicus.. Journal
of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law, (2008).;36(3):306-309.
Kerridge I, Mitchell K. Missing the point: Rogers v Whitaker and the ethical ideal of informed
and shared decision making (1994).
Knapp TA, Huff RL. Emerging trends in the physician's duty to disclose: an update of
Canterbury v. Spence. Journal of Legal Medicine. (1975) Jan;3(1):31-5.
Nolan D, Bailey S. The Page v Smith Saga: A Tale of Inauspicious Origins and Unintended
Consequences (2010).
Zopf MJ. Modest Proposal to Articulate Clearly Established Law on Stops, Tickets, Warnings,
and Searches. InIllinois Law Enforcement Executive Forum (2001) Jul (pp. 83-89).
http://www. ptb. state. il. us/.