Filing assault charges on medical professionals who makes mistakes

[Texashiker]

Where did you get the idea medical workers are immune from prosecution?

From the link in the OP, for most people, if they were to cut off the finger of an infant, that person would be prosecuted.

This is vehicular manslaughter. Plus Johnny was DUI. Two crimes right there.

A lot of people in this thread are saying there was no intent.

Where does society draw the line on the "no intent" excuse?

Daddy did not intend to leave the pistol where the baby could reach it.
Johnny did not intend to kill 3 people while driving drunk.
The doctor did not intend to leave a swab in a patient and the person die from infection.

 

[rudder]

A lot of people in this thread are saying there was no intent.

Where does society draw the line on the "no intent" excuse?

Daddy did not intend to leave the pistol where the baby could reach it.
Johnny did not intend to kill 3 people while driving drunk.
The doctor did not intend to leave a swab in a patient and the person die from infection.

It is called gross negligence. If daddy left a gun where baby could pull the trigger... this is negligence. If Johnny drinks too much, gets into a car and kills someone... this is gross negligence. If the doctor and staff does not follow standard procedures (counting swabs in and swabs out) could be grounds for negligence.

If a fully coherent nurse, who does not have a history of prior mistakes, accidentally cuts a finger while attempting to remove an IV.. this is not negligence. If hospital administrators knew the nurse had a history of bad judgments and mistakes causing injuries and did not offer her remedial training or dismissal.. this goes back to negligence. See the pattern?

 

[Capt Caveman]

Like I asked with the drunk driver example, if there is no intent, there is no crime?

child finds gun,
child shoots and kills other child,
parent is charged with child abuse resulting in death and criminal negligence

http://denver.cbslocal.com/2011/12/23/father-charged-after-child-shoots-kills-another-child/

There was no intent for the child to find the gun.

Now lets say a doctor leaves a swab in a patient during surgery, infection sets in, patient dies.

Where is the difference?

You can't be this ignorant. The doctor needs to perform procedures/prescribe medication/etc to heal someone. Unless, there's intent to harm, it's malpractice and negligence.

Based on your failed logic, every time a doctor operates on someone, it's assault and battery. If I was a doctor, I would refuse to treat people unless the success rate was 99.9%.

 

[Genx87]

From the link in the OP, for most people, if they were to cut off the finger of an infant, that person would be prosecuted.

So one incident proved to you medical personel are immune from prosecution? /facepalm

For most people they arent cutting an IV. Is it tragic? Yes! Is it criminal? I highly doubt it. Is she negligent? Absolutely and a civil settlement will most surely be reached.

What you want is absurd and would drive everybody away from the medical profession.

 

[Texashiker]

Based on your failed logic, every time a doctor operates on someone, it's assault and battery.

You give the doctor permission to preform a procedure, you do not give the doctor permission to remove the wrong kidney, remove the wrong foot,,,, and so on.

So one incident proved to you medical personel are immune from prosecution? /facepalm

The article in the OP is being used as an example.

What you want is absurd and would drive everybody away from the medical profession.

Making people accountable for their actions is absurd?

 

[Moonbeam]

From the link in the OP, for most people, if they were to cut off the finger of an infant, that person would be prosecuted.




A lot of people in this thread are saying there was no intent.

Where does society draw the line on the "no intent" excuse?

Daddy did not intend to leave the pistol where the baby could reach it.
Johnny did not intend to kill 3 people while driving drunk.
The doctor did not intend to leave a swab in a patient and the person die from infection.

The line is drawn at intent, yes or no.

All that needs to happen to clarify all of this to your mind if for you to make a small mistake somewhere that costs you everything you have. All of a sudden you will have a revelation and the pearls of wisdom you spout now will turn to garbage and all the fools posting here against your rage will seem like Solomon clones.

For some reason, perhaps a brain defect, your mind is obsessed with absolute blacks and whites in a world full of gray. Stop it. Try instead to find the rage that drives you. You were fucked over as a child and identify with the baby. We all were.

 

[Capt Caveman]

You give the doctor permission to preform a procedure, you do not give the doctor permission to remove the wrong kidney, remove the wrong foot,,,, and so on.

How is it criminal if they make a mistake? And this should end this thread.

 

[Moonbeam]

That's all Hitler wanted to do with the Jews.

Accountability is fine. What is not fine is your personal take on what accountability is being applied to other people. We leave that to more rational folk, or groups of folk to level out bias, and try to arrive at some less emotionally laden judgment that can be fair to all sides of the issue.

 

[monovillage]

As long as there was no intent, there is no crime?

Johnny goes to bar and has a little too much to drink
Johnny drives home
Johnny crosses middle line, hits car head on killing 3 people
Johnny never intended to kill anyone

Since there was no "intent", Johnny did nothing wrong?

Why should Johnny be held to a different level of responsibility then a doctor that prescribes the wrong drug and the patient dies? Or the nurse that reads the label wrong and the patient dies? Or the doctor that gives an infant an adult dose of a drug and the infant dies? Or the doctor removes the wrong kidney? Surely the doctor knows their right from left?

The driver intended to break the law by driving drunk. He had intent for the one crime which makes him responsible for other crimes caused by his actions.

 

[Gonad the Barbarian]

This was clearly an accident, or as it's known in the healthcare field, adequate care.

 

[monovillage]

This was clearly an accident, or as it's known in the healthcare field, adequate care.

I'm sure it was just another union thug nurse.

 

[actuarial]

You give the doctor permission to preform a procedure, you do not give the doctor permission to remove the wrong kidney, remove the wrong foot,,,, and so on.

Do you believe a hair dresser that cuts someones ear should be charged with assault?

 

[Texashiker]

How is it criminal if they make a mistake?

In post #19 of this thread I linked to an article about a dad who left a gun where it was accessible to a child. The child shot and killed another child. Now the dad is being charged with criminal neglect.

How is it criminal if they make a mistake?

The dad made a mistake, and is being charged with a crime.

How is the dads mistake any different then a doctor who leaves a swab in a patient, and the patient dies of an infection?

Do you believe a hair dresser that cuts someones ear should be charged with assault?

A nick on the ear is not life changing.

 

[Capt Caveman]

In post #19 of this thread I linked to an article about a dad who left a gun where it was accessible to a child. The child shot and killed another child. Now the dad is being charged with criminal neglect.

How is it criminal if they make a mistake?

The dad made a mistake, and is being charged with a crime.

How is the dads mistake any different then a doctor who leaves a swab in a patient, and the patient dies of an infection?

If you can't figure out the difference, I can't help you. I'm hoping that you're just trolling.

 

[Moonbeam]

I wonder is the nurse was overworked and under stress to hurry. If so than we are to blame, ultimately, no?

Perhaps if nurses worked for free they wouldn't be so rushed to do things.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

This was clearly an accident, or as it's known in the healthcare field, adequate care.

Nope, but a nice troll as usual.

 

[Texashiker]

If you can't figure out the difference, I can't help you.

I would like you to explain the difference.

Two people make a mistake that leads to the death of someone else. One person has criminal charges filed against him, the other person is sued in civil court.

Why is our legal system prejudice towards certain people, and blind towards others.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

In post #19 of this thread I linked to an article about a dad who left a gun where it was accessible to a child. The child shot and killed another child. Now the dad is being charged with criminal neglect.

How is it criminal if they make a mistake?

The dad made a mistake, and is being charged with a crime.

How is the dads mistake any different then a doctor who leaves a swab in a patient, and the patient dies of an infection?




A nick on the ear is not life changing.

If the situation warrants as defined by rational people criminal charges happen. What you advocate is an impossible requirement of absolute perfection that makes everyone a criminal. what fucking idiot would take that job? Everyone would be forced to quit and no new suckers would sign up. I hope you feel comfortable doing your own

 

[woolfe9999]

Why does manslaughter exist?

In this case a baby had their finger removed. Had NOTHING to do with the risks of medical procedures. Cut off by a pair of scissors when removing a simple IV.

Which species of manslaughter are we talking about? If it's voluntary manslaughter, it is done with malice aforethought but extenuating circumstances reducing it from murder to manslaughter. If it's involuntary manslaughter, there's basically 2 versions. One version is accidentally killing someone while committing a crime, typically violating traffic laws. In some states, it must be a misdemeanor like DUI. The other version involves "gross negligence," meaning something more than an ordinary screw up or error. If the doctor or nurse was drunk when he removed the finger, that might be gross negligence.

- wolf

 

[Mr. Pedantic]

Example article, baby goes into hospital with fever. An IV is inserted. While removing the IV, a nurse uses scissors to cut the tape, and cuts one of the the babies fingers off.

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2012/03/28/mom-sues-hospital-after-nurse-allegedly-cuts-off-babys-finger/

When we go into a hospital, we expect to be poked and prodded. But we do not give medical professionals permission to abuse us.

Instead of suing the hospital, why aren't criminal charges filled against the nurses and doctors.

The first thing you might say is the doctor or nurse never "intended" to harm the patient. That is true, but someone who drinks and drives never expects to get into a car wreck.

If you get your way I predict the US shortage of healthcare professionals will increase by an order of magnitude over 2 years.

Though I will say, you shouldn't normally need scissors to remove an IV.

 

[Texashiker]

What you advocate is an impossible requirement of absolute perfection that makes everyone a criminal. what fucking idiot would take that job? Everyone would be forced to quit and no new suckers would sign up. I hope you feel comfortable doing your own

It was sometime around 1990, plus or minus a few years, there was some road construction on Interstate 10 in Beaumont Texas. A truck driver was speeding through the construction zone and hit a car. The car burst into flames killing everyone inside. The truck pinned the car against the diving wall. There was no way for the family to get out when the car caught fire.

The truck driver was prosecuted for the deaths of everyone in the car.

In the case of the truck driver, the DA said speeding played a factor in causing the wreck. Did he not see the speed limit signs? Did he see the signs and ignore them?

By your logic Hayabusa Rider, why anyone want to be a truck driver? Sooner or later your going to get in a wreck, chances are people are going to die. So what idiot in their right mind would want to be a truck driver?

 

[Mark R]

Though I will say, you shouldn't normally need scissors to remove an IV.

My guess is that kids normally have to have the IV line heavily bandaged, so they don't pull it out. On a toddler, the bandage will normally cover the whole hand like a mitten. Some tape is then applied to the loose end of the bandage.

Sounds like the nurse put a blade of the scissors under the bandage to cut through the whole bandage - rather than finding the tape, pulling it up and then just cutting the tape and unwrapping the bandage.

There are special scissors designed to cut through whole bandages - but they have a special blunt, flat tip to the blade that goes against the skin so that it doesn't cut the skin, and pushes loose skin out of the way.

Given that nurses should be trained how to remove bandages, it seems likely that there was some negligence.

It's possible that it was not criminal - as criminal negligence does require the perpetrator to do something that they know to be reckless - simply doing a procedure wrongly is not criminal neglect, unless you know that you are doing it incorrectly.

 

[rudder]

It was sometime around 1990, plus or minus a few years, there was some road construction on Interstate 10 in Beaumont Texas. A truck driver was speeding through the construction zone and hit a car. The car burst into flames killing everyone inside. The truck pinned the car against the diving wall. There was no way for the family to get out when the car caught fire.

The truck driver was prosecuted for the deaths of everyone in the car.

In the case of the truck driver, the DA said speeding played a factor in causing the wreck. Did he not see the speed limit signs? Did he see the signs and ignore them?

By your logic Hayabusa Rider, why anyone want to be a truck driver? Sooner or later your going to get in a wreck, chances are people are going to die. So what idiot in their right mind would want to be a truck driver?

The driver in your example was breaking the law. If Haybusa Rider becomes a truck driver, if he follows the rules of the road and gets into an accident... it is likely the police will not charge him... even in the event someone died. Numerous wrecks occur everyday where no one is charged or cited for anything.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

It was sometime around 1990, plus or minus a few years, there was some road construction on Interstate 10 in Beaumont Texas. A truck driver was speeding through the construction zone and hit a car. The car burst into flames killing everyone inside. The truck pinned the car against the diving wall. There was no way for the family to get out when the car caught fire.

The truck driver was prosecuted for the deaths of everyone in the car.

In the case of the truck driver, the DA said speeding played a factor in causing the wreck. Did he not see the speed limit signs? Did he see the signs and ignore them?

By your logic Hayabusa Rider, why anyone want to be a truck driver? Sooner or later your going to get in a wreck, chances are people are going to die. So what idiot in their right mind would want to be a truck driver?

When it is guaranteed that truck drivers will have accidents and will be criminally Prosecuted then get back to me. Medical procedures can not have guaranteed outcomes. That is impossible. We will all have things go wrong that God might prevent. We aren't that good and neither is anyone. Since you insist we all be criminals, there aren't going to be any providers. If your kid were to have serious head trama the criminal liability would prevent any sane person from touching him. I hope your skills are good because we're all arrested or left health care. You are on your own.

 

[Lithium381]

She should be sued in civil court for her negligence, but i'm not sure if i'd call her a criminal.