Abstract
The legalities of the healthcare system require basic practical knowledge and common sense in treating patients at all times. This requires physicians to act in a professional manner and to understand their roles in managing the outcomes that are associated with the patient population and their level of care. When negligence is identified, this must be addressed in a timely manner when the facts are available. This is an important step towards the discovery of legal precedence for understanding the actions of an organization and how they impact a patient in different ways, given the issues that may pose a threat to a patient’s health and wellbeing. Therefore, proven negligence in a given case may provide further insight regarding a patient’s ability to have the authority to pursue a lawsuit against a physician, as exemplified in the case of the high school student athlete.
Body
In this case, Dr. M. committed a serious ethical error by failing to close the door or the curtain when examining the patient with osteomyelitis, and this enabled Jacob to observe this interaction and to notice that the doctor had not replaced his gloves for the other patient (Fremgen, 2011). In addition, the doctor’s revisit to Jacob’s room demonstrated his lack of respect for protocol and hygiene through his actions, and his ability to ignore all required rules and regulations regarding the use of gloves to treat each individual patient (Fremgen, 2011). This is an important reminder that physicians must act in accordance with all required rules and regulations in order to accomplish the needs of their patients without acting in a negligent manner.
Use your promo and get a custom paper on
"Legal Aspects of Healthcare".
In this case, Jacob and his parents might not have been provided with sufficient information with which to determine the type and level of symptoms that might occur at the incision site (Fremgen, 2011). As a result, it was evident that there were significant complications that could have been managed in a more efficient manner had the physician provided sufficient information to Jacob and his parents regarding the plan of care and what might be expected during the recovery stage (Fremgen, 2011). In this context, it is observed that there were difficulties associated with the limitations set forth by the physician that led to the infection at the incision site (Fremgen, 2011). Therefore, the physician was not forthcoming in providing sufficient guidance and information to the patient in order to address his possible complications from the surgery that could ultimately impact his recovery in one or more ways (Fremgen, 2011).
Based upon the information provided in the case, it was determined that the physician acted in an irresponsible manner in many ways in his failure to be effective in managing the potential problems related to the patient’s condition and in evaluating the patient’s overall health status, as well as the risks involved in this case. It was strongly evident that even if the patient followed the required protocol, the instructions given to him might not have been sufficient to manage his condition at the best possible level. Therefore, it is important to identify the areas whereby the physician might have provided sufficient information to the patient to support his recovery at a higher level without having to face significant complications. This is a reminder of the need for a physician to exercise full disclosure and to be proactive in working with patients at a level that will demonstrate a high level of success in treating a patient with the utmost courtesy, professionalism, and concern for the case and for the patient.
This case is a civil case because it would be very difficult to prove that any type of criminal act took place, particularly since there were no deaths associated with the actions taken by the physician. This is an important reminder of the need to facilitate understand the legalities behind civil and criminal cases in order to determine when and which type of legal action is necessary within a given case.
There are significant issues related to negligence related to this case due to the physician’s lack of adherence to protocol and a lack of understanding of the needs of the patient during the treatment phase. In addition, this could also be evaluated in a malpractice context because it demonstrates a clear lack of sound and reasonable judgment on behalf of the physician in charge of the case.
As a result of the doctor’s actions, the civil case should be brought forth in a court of law in order to prove that his negligent behavior led to the patient’s osteomyelitis condition, given that the doctor did not follow protocol as required when working with one patient after another. This is a disturbing series of events that requires further consideration and focus in order to determine the type of punishment that the doctor deserves for his negligent actions. Most likely, monetary damages would ensue, along with a possible temporary suspension of the doctor’s license without pay.
From an ethical point of view, this case represents a need to develop a greater understanding of one’s motivation to act in an ethically responsible manner, and what enables others to act without regard for ethical principles. In this context, a patient’s health may be compromised as a result of negative decision-making by a physician, as demonstrated in the case study. This is a sound reminder of the need for full disclosure and to be proactive in making positive decisions that will impact patients in a favorable manner, rather than to act out of carelessness and disregard for the needs of patients in these cases. This is an important reminder for physicians to act responsibility at all times and to provide patients with the tools that are necessary to promote a full recovery.
Conclusion
The primary nature of medical ethics requires physicians to act in a professional and responsible manner towards all patients under all conditions. This is an important step towards the discovery of new ideas and approaches to promote full disclosure in an effort to salvage one’s professional reputation and ethical decision-making capabilities (Jones & McCullough, 2013). This process will also ensure that an organization is prepared to manage the risks associated with patient care outcomes and to reflect upon the demands of the organization in order to achieve high ethical standards. Therefore, in this case, full disclosure by the physician in a court of law is essential in order to demonstrate a commitment to truthfulness and ethical responsibility for one’s actions in the workplace environment that pose a threat to patient health and wellbeing (Ghalandarpoorattar et.al, 2012).
