Question

A primary care provider prescribes one tablet, but the nurse accidentally administers two. After notifying the primary care provider, the nurse monitors the client carefully for untoward effects of which there are none. Is the client likely to be successful in suing the nurse for professional negligence?

a. No, the client was not harmed.
b. No, the nurse notified the primary care provider.
c. Yes, a breach of duty exists.
d. Yes, foreseeability is present.

Answer 1

In the case of the nurse administering a higher dosage without harm to the client, although there was a breach of duty, the absence of harm (no damages) would make a successful lawsuit for professional negligence unlikely. The principle of nonmaleficence is relevant but the lack of harm done may be a key factor in the legal outcome.

Step-by-step explanation:

In the scenario where a nurse administers twice the prescribed dosage of medication, but the client suffers no untoward effects, and the nurse has informed the primary care provider and monitored the client, the situation involves several legal concepts. Professional negligence typically requires proof of a duty to the patient, a breach of that duty, causation, and damages. Since the client was not harmed, it may be difficult to prove the last element, which is damages. The principle of nonmaleficence suggests that health care professionals should not cause harm to patients, and in this case, despite the breach of duty, no harm was done. This could influence the likelihood of a successful lawsuit against the nurse for professional negligence.

To establish a successful claim of professional negligence, typically, all four elements must be proven. The absence of harm to the client, in this case, suggests that it might be challenging for the client to be successful in such a lawsuit. However, the ultimate outcome would depend on the jurisdiction's specific legal standards and the facts of the case as presented in court.