A nurse on your unit is being sued for negligence in connection with a patient.

Here are
the facts of the incident: The doctor ordered that a medication be administered to the
patient via an indwelling IV. The nurse prepared the solution using a drug with a similar
name but a completely different formulation. As a result the patient went into cardiac
arrest, but was revived and is slowly recovering. Four elements must be present to
prove a negligence action. Are these elements present here? What are they? Please
make sure your answers are as thorough as possible.
Negligence is a general term that refers to conduct lacking in due care (Guido, 2009,
p. 92).
If harm is caused by negligence, it is termed an unintentional tort and damages may be
recovered.
Experts differ on what should be termed the essential characteristics of negligence. For
our purposes, we will identify four main characteristics and indicate common variations.

1. Harm: Harm must have occurred to an individual. Injury (which is the basis of harm)
and damages (which include the consequences to the person of the injury) are
considered separate characteristics by some.
2. Duty: The negligent person must have been in a situation where he or she had a
responsibility or duty toward the person harmed.
3. Breach of Duty: The person must be found to have failed to fulfill his or her
responsibility. This might include either doing what should not have been done
(commission of an inappropriate action) or failing to do what should have been done
(omission of a necessary or appropriate action). This is also referred to as failing to act
as a reasonably prudent person. A reasonably prudent person in this context means
someone who demonstrates careful and thoughtful action. Some authorities emphasize
that this includes the responsibility to foresee possible results of a situation and act
appropriately, also referred to as foreseeability. Foreseeability is identified by some
experts as a separate characteristic.
4. Causation: The harm or injury must be shown to have been caused by the breach of
duty.

Essay: The U.S. Legal System Critical Thinking Question

A nurse on your unit is being sued for negligence in connection with a patient. Here are
the facts of the incident: The doctor ordered that a medication be administered to the
patient via an indwelling IV. The nurse prepared the solution using a drug with a similar
name but a completely different formulation. As a result the patient went into cardiac
arrest, but was revived and is slowly recovering. Four elements must be present to
prove a negligence action. Are these elements present here? What are they? Please
make sure your answers are as thorough as possible.
In this case study we found four elements proving that it is a negligence act.
Negligence is a general term that refers to conduct lacking in due care (Guido, G. W.
(2009). Legal and ethical issues in nursing (5th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice
Hall, p. 92).
Negligence is a sort of tort; it is the cornerstone of the malpractice case. There are four
elements in a negligence action: duty, dereliction of duty, direct cause, and
harm/damages (Aiken), Elsevier. Legal and Ethical Issues for Health Professions, 3rd
Edition. Saunders, 2015. Vital Book file, p. 8
Duty is when a negligent person must have been in a situation where he or she had a
responsibility or duty toward the person harmed.
In the dereliction of duty the person must be found to have failed to fulfill his or her
responsibility. This might include either doing what should not have been done
(commission of an inappropriate action) or failing to do what should have been done
(omission of a necessary or appropriate action). This is also referred to as failing to act
as a reasonably prudent person.
Direct cause or Causation: The harm or injury must be shown to have been caused by
the breach of duty.
Harm/Damages: Harm must have occurred to an individual. Injury (which is the basis of
harm) and damages (which include the consequences to the person of the injury) are
considered separate characteristics by some.
In the cause study we found that the nurse is responsible for preparing and
administering the medication prescribed by the doctors patient, the nurse is the person
assigned to care for the patient and in this particularly case the person indicated to
execute the doctors order. This is the nurses duty.

Secondly, the nurse has failed to act as a prudent professional in her responsibility of
the preparation of the solution using a similar name of the medication but with a
different formulation and this is when she has a dereliction of her duty.
As a result of the nurses dereliction of duty the patient suffered a cardiac arrest, being
this the main cause, describing in the case-study the term of direct cause of causation.
Therefore, the cardiac arrest is the harm caused to the patient; this is a situation that
exemplified when a case does not need to be proved in court, because the
responsibility is clear enough, the legal term res ipsa loquitur is used. (Nursing in
todays world, 10 Edition, Dr Janice Rider Ellis RN PdD ANEF Ms. Celia Love Hart,
p.254).
As a conclusion we are in front of an act of negligence perpetrated by a nurse with a
duty of a professional toward a patient, causing harm to this patient when she had a
breach of duty using a different formulation with a medication indicated to the patient,
causing a cardiac arrest to the patient as harm.