2-1 Discussion_ In the News Ethical and legal considerations
docx
keyboard_arrow_up
School
Southern New Hampshire University *
*We aren’t endorsed by this school
Course
IHP-420-X3
Subject
Medicine
Date
Dec 6, 2023
Type
docx
Pages
3
Uploaded by phillipmorrison12
Greetings, fellow participants.
In June 2013, an individual named Ms. Beatrice Weisman, who was 83
years old at the time, had a severe stroke. Before the occurrence, Ms.
Beatrice and her spouse, William, created advance directives and
designated her spouse as the one responsible for making medical
choices in the event that she became incapacitated. In the month of
August, the individual's health status had declined, prompting her
spouse to convene a gathering with their four offspring. During the
meeting, the husband communicated to the children that he had
provided consent for the implementation of the Medical Orders for Life-
Sustaining Treatment (MOLST) or Physician Orders for Life-Sustaining
Treatment (POLST) form. This document specifies that in the event of
his wife experiencing heart or lung failure, she should be left to pass
away.
Nevertheless, on August 29, 2013, upon the discovery of Ms. Weisman
exhibiting cyanosis in her bed, personnel initiated cardiopulmonary
resuscitation (CPR), resulting in the occurrence of fractured ribs and
pneumothorax. The patient was subjected to defibrillation by the
administration of electric shocks, followed by the administration of
epinephrine, resulting in a successful resuscitation. According to
Christian Weisman, the oldest child of the marriage, his father
experienced significant distress. According to the individual, their parents
had diligently completed all the necessary legal documents, including
wills, advance directives, and the Molst. However, upon discovering the
deteriorating condition of the patient, the medical staff proceeded to
disregard her expressed desires. Mr. Weisman has initiated legal
proceedings against Maryland General Hospital, asserting allegations of
assault, negligence, intentional infliction of mental distress, and several
other claims, in relation to the care provided to his mother.
The standard of care was breached in this particular scenario.
Notwithstanding the individual's personal conduct, the staff members
would be afforded protection under the Good Samaritan statutes. The
Good Samaritan laws refer to state statutes that aim to safeguard health
care professionals and ordinary individuals from legal responsibility while
rendering assistance to a victim of an accident or emergency situation.
According to Fremgen (2019), the provision of emergency help
mandated by this legislation necessitates its immediate administration at
the location where the accident or catastrophe occurred. Nevertheless,
the scope of protection provided by this legislation is subject to certain
limitations, which may differ across different jurisdictions. In the event
that an emergency provider engages in an act of gross negligence,
whereby their actions demonstrate a clear disregard for the well-being of
the victim and would be recognized as harmful by a reasonable
individual, the legal protection afforded to them would be revoked,
therefore allowing for the initiation of a lawsuit (Fremgen, 2019).
Therefore, in this particular scenario, the patient's preferences were not
taken into account prior to providing treatment.
Furthermore, it is crucial to acknowledge that several states have
implemented supplementary safeguards within the framework of this
legislation. Hence, due to the variability of Good Samaritan laws across
different states, it is essential for healthcare professionals to possess
comprehensive knowledge and comprehension of the Good Samaritan
laws specific to their respective states. It is essential to note that the
Good Samaritan laws do not provide legal protection to doctors or their
workers from responsibility while carrying out their professional duties
inside their workplace.
References
Fremgen, Bonnie F. Medical Law and Ethics. Available from: MBS Direct,
(6th Edition). Pearson Education (US), 2019.
Span, Paula. The patients were saved. Thats way the families are suing.
The New York Times, 2017.
The Patients Were Saved. That’s Why the
Families Are Suing. - The New York Times (nytimes.com)
less
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