Download file to see previous pages...
It further defines and discusses apparent agency and the impact the status of the agent/employee versus independent contractor have on the analysis of liability.
When it comes to criminal prosecution of negligence in the medical field, the law is in no way lenient. Murthy defines negligence as carelessness in a situation where the law mandates one to be careful. A breach of this gives the patient a right to file a case in court. In a case between Poonam Verma and Ashwin Patel in India, the terms negligence, acting in a rash and being reckless were defined. Negligence was defined as when one excludes or goes against a positive responsibility unintentionally. On the other hand, a reckless person was defined as one who is aware of the results of his or her actions but chooses not to care. Finally, a rash person was described as one who is aware of the results of his or her deeds, but assumes they will not happen. With regard to this, a doctor should not be criminally charged for the death of an individual until there is evidence of negligence or incompetence. In cases of malpractice, there are two damages provided. One is the compensatory damage where the hospital compensates the patient and the other is the disciplinary or punitive damage where the hospital is punished for the negligence or omissions that led to malpractice. In fact, the Indian Penal Code, section 304(a) reads that any person who causes a patient to depart this life either due to an act of negligence or rash behaviour should serve two years in prison, pay a fine or receive punishment of the two (Murthy, 2007).
In healthcare, a health providing institution can be held liable for any harm done to a patient. According to Donoghue, a hospital can be held liable either directly due to their negligence or vicariously for the negligence of an employee in cases of hospital malpractice. When hiring a member of staff, a hospital has to take great care. The hospital is supposed to
...Download file to see next pagesRead More
The case is charged in the court in order to establish the liable party and assess the damages the wrongdoer is supposed to pay to the wronged party. According to common-law doctrine, employers are held responsible for the mistakes or carelessness of their workers (Engel & Mccann 2009, P.234).
For example, an employer may be held liable for a tort committed by his/her employee (Anselmi, 2012). On the contrary, corporate liability involves a legal responsibility of a company due to criminal acts executed by its employers. Corporate liability focuses to determine the extent in which a company may be held liable for the criminal acts committed by a natural person employed by that company (Bright, 2008).
On the other hand, medical experts comment that aiding in the patient's death goes against a physician's duty to preserve life (University of Washington School of Medicine). However, it is said that the four factors judge the decision of euthanasia or physician assisted suicide: level of patient suffering, the extent to which the patient requested death, the age of the patient, and the degree of curability of the illness.
ss of getting permission from the patient for a particular treatment after providing enough information about the pros and cons of that treatment to the patient. The core of informed consent is based on ethical and moral grounds. In other words, it is the patient’s right
Firstly the improper care taken during shifting of beds resulting in pulling out of the IV. Secondly, the unresponsiveness of the patient’s cardiologist to repeated attempts of contact made by the nurse, informing the unavailability of other physicians
The plaintiff may substantiate/prove the aspects of vicarious liability in three ways namely: if employee was acting within the scope of his/her employment, the employer was in full capacity to control the acts of its employees. Lastly, there was an