Abstract
The current century faces failures from the medical fraternity, as well as increasing depreciation in health status of a number of people. This results into a sharp twist in defining practices in medicine and nursing. Nurses face challenging situations from patients they handle in their facilities, an extent that endangers their lives. Similarly, patients in medical facilities face problems of negligence from untrained caretakers and malpractice from medical practitioners. These cases involve poor administering of medication to patients, which result into medical practitioners risking their jobs. As much as people seek care from various professionals, they have a right to care that meet the standards of situations at hand (Guido, 2009).
Principles of protecting patient safety
Medical practitioners and police adhere to various principles in ensuring safety of patients during restrain. These principles apply depending on the condition of a patient at any moment. For most protection, the professionals offer duty owed the patient. The medical practitioner in charge monitors a patient regularly due to ensure no self destruction. This is clear as Mr. Garcia admits to the police about his wish to cause himself harm. Thus, professional medical practitioner and a police officer should take care of him during restraints. The police being aware of Mr. Garcia’s unstable condition, he requires care of a competent professional to help control his situation. Cause-in-fact is an important principle when restraining Mr. Garcia as he is a danger to himself; this offers extra safety. This also ensures that he has frequent monitoring to reduce chances of causing self-harm (Guido, 2009).
Defendants in the case
Mr. Garcia’s likelihood of causing self harm makes him liable to professional medical care. Being that he awaits admission to acute care psychiatric unit while in soft restraints; a nurse needs to continuously check his condition. In addition, a police officer is available if his situation becomes unmanageable. The two professionals are to work together in ensuring that Mr. Garcia keeps himself from any harm. The death of Mr. Garcia indicates that he fails to receive enough care from the police and the hospital staff. On the contrary, the hospital staffs are fully liable for his death. This is because he is left within the medical facilities awaiting further treatment (Guido, 2009).
The hospital staffs have capacity to control his mental condition by providing approved medication before further treatment. In addition, they have responsibility to give him advanced medical care within their hospital. The patient dies because he escapes from hospital without notice. Moreover, he goes to the hospital as a result of efforts from the police and a medical staff. Mr. Garcia fails to receive one-on-one attention from any medical practitioner since he awaits further medication from the hospital. Consequently, a patient- nurse relationship exists as the hospital staffs are aware to his condition (Guido, 2009).
Increasing demand for medical care, as well as malpractices among medical professionals makes nursing a focal point in our society. Quite often, patients lose their lives despite being under professional care (Byers and White, 2004). As a result, families of the deceased sue parties involved in providing care to the late one. In such situations, the law courts intervene as in the case of Mr. Garcia. The court has to make final ruling on Mr. Garcia’s death as it receives a report of wrongful death from his widow.
The hospital staff and the police are held responsible, as they decide to put him in soft restraints. Despite receiving verbal communication from him about his will to cause self harm, the hospital gives minimal care. He is left alone, whereas the hospital staffs are aware of him being a self-destructive patient (Guido, 2009). The court has enough proofs to rule against the hospital staff for malpractice. This is because they have legal responsibility on the patient’s whereabouts and his activities within and without their facility (Guido, 2009).
Examples of court rulings
Reid versus Altieri (2007), the court, holds the hospital liable for a patient’s death due to failure of providing professional care. In addition, the patient informs a triage nurse about his intentions of committing suicide. Hooper versus County of Cook (2006), the hospital, is held responsible for failure to offer one on one care to a mentally unstable patient. Despite identifying that he needs seclusion to control his condition, no immediate action saves the patients situation. Eventually, he escapes and is found dead by another patient in the washroom (Guido, 2009).
Conclusion
Rising challenges facing medical facilities in the current society are preventable. Medical facilities need to allow audit studies, which help determine their levels of compliance with set national standards. This ensures that challenges medical facilities face is understandable and addressable by the medical practitioners. Consequently, nurses are able to understand consequences of situations they face. This enables them to give standard care to patients, as well as administer their medication in accordance to the law. Families of patients have a right to adequate information about the person’s health. This helps in cases where a family’s attention is essential in ensuring a patient’s safety (Pozgar, 2012).
References
Byers, F. J., & White, V. S. (Eds.). (2004). Patient Safety: principals and practice. New York: Springer Publishing Company.
Guido, W. G. (2009) Legal & Ethical Issues in Nursing. (5th ed.). New York: Pearson Education.
Pozgar, D.G. (2012). Patient Care Case Law. Burlington: Jones & Bartlett Publishers.