Legal and Ethical Issues in Law - Essay Example

Legal and Ethical Issues in Law An organization, individual or business can place a suit for a given violation. In addition, a minor who is below the age of 18 can sue with the help of his or her guardian or parent. In this case, Mrs. Johnson will be able to sue Dr. Benzene for the violation of the rule requiring medical practitioners to provide notice to the State Attorney regarding any patient displaying suicidal tendencies. Given that the two small children are minors, Mrs. Johnson can also sue on their behalf because she is their parent. The family of Mrs. Spirelli could also sue Dr. Benzene for negligence in his work especially if they knew of his omission to inquire about his true feelings concerning his suicidal thoughts because of the possibility that Mr. Johnson’s terrain of thought could lead him to cause harm both to himself and others. Causes of action The plaintiff can sue for negligence on the part of Dr. Benzene. Negligence refers to a situation where a person does something wrong accidentally thereby causing one to get hurt. As such, a person involved in negligent behavior is likely to be held liable by way of damages. Basically, it involves an individual’s failure to take reasonable care in a situation that a person exercising ordinary prudence ought to take under similar circumstances (Ferrerra et al., 72). Dr. Benzene did not exercise reasonable care especially because it is expected that a doctor like him should have foreseen harm. Dr. Benzene should have inquired from Mr. Johnson whether indeed his findings and thoughts were an expression of his true feelings. Dr. Benzene has a legal issues to answer to because he had the duty to act but failed because of his omission to do so by taking necessary steps including inquiring the feelings of Mr. Johnson so that he could at least attempt to avert the foreseen danger. Doctor Benzene and his office can be sued for the violation of the law enacted by the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. The law simply required medical practitioners such as Doctor Benzene to notify the office of the State Attorney regarding the homicidal or suicidal tendencies exhibited by Mr. Johnson. The policy had not made any provisions for exceptional cases where the defendant could not be held liable. As such, Doctor Benzene’s move to issue patients with forms in order to free himself and all the staff from any liabilities that may arise did not in any way protect or exempt him from facing the consequences of his actions. The legislation passed by the Commonwealth of Massachusetts was supreme. Therefore, the potential law suit that he could be charged with relates to that of a criminal offense in which case he may serve five years in prison in accordance to the set punishment as well as pay a fine amounting to two thousand dollars. Defenses It is highly likely that Doctor Benzene may refer to the fact that the patients had signed documents that freed his office, himself, and all the staff from any liability to his defense thus exhibiting a defense known as Volenti non fit injuria. This defense implies that the claimant in this case Mrs. Johnson on behalf of Mr. Johnson voluntarily showed his acceptance with regards to the risk of harm or injury when he signed the forms that were issued to him in the presence of witnesses with the same being notarized. The forms signed had clearly stated that the comments, statements, anecdotes, or analogies presented during the patient’s therapeutic sessions were to be regarded as mere hypothetical discussions. Exceptions were only made regarding situations where the doctor inquired if the patients’ thoughts were the true feelings of the patients. Therefore, given that the Doctor did not inquire and thereby ascertain whether the words of Mr. Johnson were his true feelings then Benzene may stage the defense of not being aware that Mr. Johnson was expressing his personal feelings. In fact, he may allege that he assumed that his conversation with Mr. Johnson during the conversation was just general statements or comments and that he did not think that his remarks were serious. Generally, the patient’s signature appended in the signed forms will serve as a good defense aimed at freeing him for any liability. Nevertheless, Dr. Benzene may not be able to get away with this defense because the clause that makes him liable for inquiring the patient’s true feelings may have motivated his action of deliberately avoiding to find out whether Mr. Johnson’s thoughts were an expression of his personal feelings. Additionally, Doctor Benzene can use the defense of contributory negligence in his favor. In this case, he reduces the damages that he is likely to suffer because he will take part of their blame while alleging that Mr. Johnson contributed in some way to the loss and destruction. In this case, the move of Mr. Johnson consenting to sign the forms or failing to express communicate that those were his true feelings amount to contributory negligence thus they both share the blame of the harm caused as a result of the homicidal event. Ethical issues and Applicable ethical theory The ethical issue of beneficence emerges in the case. Beneficence focuses on one’s commitment to ensure that the good or well-being of the client is achieved. Doctor Benzene was supposed to act while giving consideration to the client’s best interests. This position would have required that Doctor Benzene should use his experience and competence to assist Mr. Johnson. Contrary to expectations, Benzene did not take time to understand his client’s plight despite the fact that the patient had come for therapy. Non-maleficence is another ethical issue that helps in avoiding malpractice. Benzene failed to observe the principle of non-maleficence when he deliberately ignored asking the questions that would help him understand the extent of the patient’s problem. Benzene had the ethical responsibility to make efforts to mitigate any harm that would have occurred to Mr. Johnson. The applicable theory in this scenario is the deontological theory. This ethical doctrine stipulates that individuals ought to adhere to their duties and obligation in his or her analysis of an ethical dilemma. Clearly, Benzene was faced with an ethical dilemma as he was torn between avoiding any liability that may come up as a result of the newly established law and performing his medical duty in an ethical manner. Deontology is a theory that offers a basis for individuals to perform their obligations in certain individuals. In line with this theory, Benzene should have observed the ethical theory of Deontology then he would have been able to save avoid the death of Mr. Johnson and Mrs. Spirelli while at the same time preventing the destruction of property. Works Cited Ferrera, Gerald R, Mystica M. Alexander, William P. Wiggins, Cheryl Kirschner, and Jonathan J. Darrow. The Legal and Ethical Environment of Business: An Integrated Approach. , 2014. Print. Read More