Medical Malpractice: When Can Patients Sue a Hospital for Negligence - Essay Example

Medical Malpractice: When Can Patients Sue a Hospital for Negligence?IntroductionFirst of all, before we embark on tackling the issue at hand, it is imperative to mention that, in the event that a hospital employee acts in any way that hurts a patient, the hospital in such a case may be held liable. This is under the principle of vicarious liability which provides that, employers will be deemed to be vicariously liable for the torts of their employees but only those committed during the course of employment.

Having said that, it is important to determine first and foremost who an employee is. In most cases, nurses, medical technicians, and paramedics are hospital employees but the same does not necessarily apply to doctors who at times use hospital premises to offer their services and cannot therefore be regarded to be employees. For example, a paramedic who is employed by a certain hospital, gives a patient the wrong injection. In such a case, the hospital will be held liable.What is gross negligence?

It occurs when one acts in a manner likely to cause injury to another without regard for the potential victim. There are three elements required to prove gross negligence; the plaintiff needs to prove that the defendant owes him/her a duty of care. Secondly, the plaintiff needs to show that the duty of care owed as breached. Lastly, the claimant must prove that the loss suffered was caused by the defendant. This is the element of causation which is the question under discussion and therefore we shall delve deeper into it.

How do you determine causation? You simply carry out the 'but for' test- ask 'but for' the defendant's actions, would the claimant have suffered the loss? If the answer is in the affirmitive, then the defendant is not liable. If no, then the defendant is liable. HospitalThe hospital’s liability will be solely dependant on its employee’s liability simply based on the principle of vicarious liability. Therefore, if any of the three employees namely the physician, nurse or ER tech are found liable, then by default the hospital will also be liable.

PhysicianThe physician has not been mentioned in the scenario given and therefore cannot be held liable.ER TechThe ER Tech carried out his duties diligently when he went to the patient’s room to check up on him and even though the nurse casually told him that the patient was probably drunk, he went ahead and made sure that the stretcher was up and then went to help the other nurses. No acts of negligence can be claimed to have been committed.NurseThe nurse was negligent because upon realising that the patient has become restless, anxious and unco-operative, he made an assumption that the patient was drunk nd even discouraged the ER tech from giving him too much of his time.

Before this also, the nurse will checking on the patient did not finish carrying out the assessment and quickly shifted his attention to other patients brought in. Would the patient have died ‘but for’ the nurse’s negligent ommission? No. This is because further assessment would have revealed that patient was suffering from internal bleeding due to a ruptured spleen. ReferencesCoulter B. (2008). Medical Malpractice: When Can Patients Sue a Hospital for Negligence?Russell G. & Thornton. (2006).

JD Malice/gross negligence