Case Study Ethical Legal Dilemma Advanced Practice Nursing

Subject: General Questions    / General General Questions
Question
Kaplan MN506 unit 4 Assignment Latest 2017 February

MN506: Unit 4 Assignment

Case Study Ethical Legal Dilemma Advanced Practice Nursing

Course outcomes addressed in this Assignment:

MN506-1: Apply theoretical frameworks and concepts to ethical dilemmas in the advanced practice role.

PC 2.3: Demonstrate integrity through the application of relevant codes of conduct and social responsibility within one’s profession.

Please take a moment to watch this Assignment Introduction, or read the presentation transcript.

Instructions:

Create an ethical legal decision-making dilemma involving an advanced practice nurse in the field of education, informatics, administration, or a nurse practitioner. Apply relevant codes of conduct that apply to the practice of nursing and your chosen field.

Include one ethical principle and one law that could be violated and whether the violation would constitute a civil or criminal act based on facts.

Construct a decision that demonstrates integrity and that would prevent violation of the ethical principle and prevent the law from being violated.

Describe the legal principles and laws that apply to the ethical dilemma.

Support the legal issues with prior legal cases or state or federal statutes.

Analyze the differences between ethical and legal reasoning and apply an ethical-legal reasoning model in the case study to create a basis for a solution to the ethical-legal dilemma.

List three recommendations that will resolve advanced practice nurses’ moral distress in the dilemma you have presented.

Based on the issue you presented and the rules of the law, apply the laws to your case and come up with a conclusion.

Note:

This is a fact-based Assignment that will not include your opinion.

This will require research and support for what is written.

The Assignment should be in your words after reading the scholarly and fact-based publications and have proper citations. There should be no quotations. The professor wants to hear your voice as a masters trained nurse.

Description

In the Unit 2 topic 1 Discussion, you will choose an ethical-legal dilemma that would cause the advanced practice nurse moral distress. You will write the introductory paragraphs for the Unit 4 Assignment in the Unit 2 topic 1 Discussion Board and post it for your peers to comment on.

You will continue working on the topic you have chosen and submit the paper using the most recent version of APA format. A template is provided in the left navigation of the course room for the paper. The paper should have a minimum of seven citations and some of these should be case law or applicable statutes. The Kaplan Library has Westlaw Campus Researchdatabase where you can find case laws that relate to your topic. The APA Manual and the textbook have instructions on legal formatting.

Due: Day 7 by 11:59 p.m. (ET)

To view the Grading Rubric for this Assignment, please visit the Grading Rubrics section of the Course Home.

Assignment Requirements:

Before finalizing your work, you should:

be sure to read the Assignment description carefully (as displayed above);

consult the Grading Rubric (under the Course Home) to make sure you have included everything necessary; and

utilize spelling and grammar check to minimize errors.

Your writing Assignment should:

follow the conventions of Standard American English (correct grammar, punctuation, etc.);

be well ordered , logical, and unified , as well as original and insightful ;

display superior content, organization, style,and mechanics ; and

use APA 6th Edition format as outlined in the APA Progression Ladder.

How to Submit:

Submit your Assignment to the unit Dropbox before midnight on the last day of the unit.

Kaplan MN506 unit 7 Assignment Latest 2017 February

MN506: Unit 8 Assignment

Controversial Treatments and Legislative Change

Course Outcomes addressed in this assignment

MN506-3: Evaluate the implications of the effects of contemporary health policy on providers and consumers.

MN506-4: Assess the legislative and policy-making strategies specific to scope of practice and nursing roles that influence health care services and practice.

Choose a health care treatment option that is controversial and maybe costly. Describe the positive and negative benefits from the treatment, evidence of effectiveness, and the potential harm of a different treatment option. What strategies would you use to advocate for a legislative change in your state to influence insurance coverage for this treatment.

Choose a controversial health care treatment option. Describe the treatment.

Describe the social and legal controversy associated with your controversial treatment.

Describe the evidence that supports the effectiveness of the controversial treatment.

Describe the evidence that does not support the effectiveness of the controversial treatment.

Compare and contrast the positive and negative benefits or harm of the controversial treatment.

Compare and contrast positive and negative aspects of available traditional treatments.

Compare and contrast the costs of the controversial treatment with the costs associated with traditional treatments

Describe the required process for legislative change to occur in your state.

Describe a strategies that you would you use at the local and state level to advocate for a legislative change in your state that would influence insurance coverage for this treatment.

Provide an estimated timeline for your legislative change to occur. Use the steps describe in required process for legislative change for your state.

Note:

This is a fact-based Assignment that will not include your opinion.

This will require research and support for what is written.

The Assignment should be in your words after reading the scholarly and fact-based publications and have proper citations. There should be no quotations. The professor wants to hear your voice as a masters trained nurse.

The paper should have a minimum of seven citations and some of these should be case law or applicable statutes.

Due: Day 7 by 11:59 p.m. (ET)

To view the Grading Rubric for this Assignment, please visit the Grading Rubrics section of the Course Home.

Assignment Requirements:

Before finalizing your work, you should:

Be sure to read the Assignment description carefully (as displayed above);

Consult the Grading Rubric (under the Course Home) to make sure you have included everything necessary; and

Utilize spelling and grammar check to minimize errors.

Your writing Assignment should:

Follow the conventions of Standard American English (correct grammar, punctuation, etc.;

Be well ordered, logical, and unified, as well as original and insightful;

Display superior content, organization, style, and mechanics; and

Use APA 6th Edition format as outlined in the APA Progression Ladder.

How to Submit:

Submit your Assignment to the unit Drop box before midnight on the last day of the unit.

When you are ready to submit your Assignment, click the Drop box tab and select this unit’s basket from the dropdown menu, then attach your file. Make sure to save a copy of your work and be sure to confirm that your file uploaded correctly.

For help uploading your file, review the Student Guide to the Drop box.

How to Submit

Submit your Assignment to the unit Dropbox before midnight on the last day of the unit.

When you are ready to submit your Assignment, click the Dropbox tab and select this unit’s basket from the dropdown menu, then attach your file. Make sure to save a copy of your work and be sure to confirm that your file uploaded correctly.

Kaplan MN506 unit 8 Assignment Latest 2017 February

Group Project: Assignment Legal Malpractice Case Description

Outcomes addressed in this Assignment:

MN506-2: Critique ethical-legal concepts, principles, and dilemmas related to the provision of health care.

Please take a moment to watch this Assignment Introduction, or read the presentation transcript.

Instructions:

You will construct a group contract in Unit 2. In the contract, you will determine how your group will communicate and share documents. Roles of the group will be delineated. You will work from Unit 3 to Unit 7 on a malpractice case.

There are two malpractice cases. Your instructor will assign your group either Case Study 1: Malpractice Action brought by Yolanda Pinnelas or Case Study 2: Wrongful Death by Howard Carpenter on Behalf of Wilma Carpenter, Deceased. The group will construct a 10–15-page paper about the legal constructs involved in one of the cases.

Directions:

The group will write a10–15-page APA formatted paper (title page and references list do not count towards the 10–15 pages). Support the paper with peer reviewed articles and case law where applicable. You must have minimum of eight references. You may have an appendix that has samples of documents that support your positions or expands on the facts of the case.

You will post a draft of the group paper in the Discussion Board of Unit 7. This will give you an opportunity to get peer feedback and to learn from others.

You may use Goggle Hangouts™, SKYPE®, or other conferencing tools. Additionally, you may want to use a document-sharing tool such as Google Drive®. The paper should discuss the following issues:

Liability issues

Parties involved and who should be sued

Defenses of the parties

Documents that the plaintiff’s side will ask for and how they will be used

Standards of care

Duty, breach, damages, and proximate cause

Insurance issues

Risk management issues before and after the incident

Documentation and mandatory reporting

Who should write the incident report and what should it say?

The doctrine of Respondeat Superior and how it would apply the issues surrounding informed consent Preparation for court of the parties.

Due: Day 7 by 11:59 p.m. (ET)

Case Study 1: Malpractice Action Brought by Yolanda Pinnelas

People involved in case:

Yolanda Pinnelas — patient

Betty DePalma, RN, MS — nursing supervisor

Elizabeth Adelman, RN — recovery room nurse

William Brady, M.D. — plastic surgeon

Mary Jones, RN — IV insertion

Carol Price, LPN

Jeffery Chambers, RN — staff nurse

Patricia Peters, PharmD — pharmacy

Diana Smith, RN

Susan Post, JD — risk manager

Amy Green — quality assurance

Michael Parks, RN, MS, CNS — education coordinator

SAFE-INFUSE — pump

Brand X infusion — pump

Caring Memorial Hospital

Facts:

The patient, Yolanda Pinellas, is a 21-year-old female admitted to Caring Memorial Hospital for chemotherapy. Caring Memorial is a hospital in upstate New York. Yolanda was a student at Ithaca College and studying to be a music conductor.

Yolanda was diagnosed with anal cancer and was to receive Mitomycin for her chemotherapy. Mary Jones, RN, inserted the IV on the day shift around 1300, and the patient, Yolanda, was to have Mitomycin administered through the IV. An infusion machine was used for the delivery. The Mitomycin was hung by Jeffery Chambers, RN, and he was assigned to Yolanda. The unit had several very sick patients and was short staffed. Jeffery had worked a double shift the day before and had to double back to cover the evening shift. He was able to go home between shifts and had about 6 hours of sleep before returning. The pharmacy was late in delivering the drug so it was not hung until the evening shift. Patricia Peters, PharmD, brought the chemotherapy to the unit.

On the evening shift, Carol Price, LPN, heard the infusion pump beep several times. She had ignored it as she thought someone else was caring for the patient. Diana Smith, RN, was also working the shift and had heard the pump beep several times. She mentioned it to Jeffery. She did not go into the room until about 45 minutes later. The patient testified that a nurse came in and pressed some buttons and the pump stopped beeping. She was groggy and not sure who the nurse was or what was done.

Diana Smith responded to the patient’s call bell and found the IV had been dislodged from the patient’s vein. There was no evidence that the Mitomycin had gone into the patient’s tissue. Diana immediately stopped the IV, notified the physician, and provided care to the hand. The documentation in the medical record indicates that there was an infiltration to the IV.

The hospital was testing a new IV infusion pump called SAFE-INFUSE. The supervisory nurse was Betty DePalma, RN. Betty took the pump off the unit. No one made note of the pump’s serial number as there were six in the hospital being used. There was also another brand of pumps being used in the hospital. It was called Brand X infusion pump. Betty did not note the name of the pump or serial number. The pump was not isolated or sent to maintenance and eventually the hospital decided not to use SAFE-INFUSE so the loaners were sent back to the company.

Betty and Dr. William Brady are the only ones that carry malpractice insurance. The hospital also has malpractice insurance.

Two weeks after the event, the patient developed necrosis of the hand and required multiple surgical procedures, skin grafting, and reconstruction. She had permanent loss of function and deformity in her third, fourth, and fifth fingers. The claimant is alleging that, because of this, she is no longer able to perform as a conductor, for which she was studying.

During the procedure for the skin grafting, the plastic surgeon, Dr. William Brady, used a dermatome that resulted in uneven harvesting of tissue and further scarring in the patient’s thigh area where the skin was harvested.

The risk manager is Susan Post, JD, who works in collaboration with the quality assurance director Amy Green. Amy had noted when doing chart reviews over the last 3 months prior to this incident that there were issues of short staffing and that many nurses were working double shifts, evenings, and nights then coming back and working the evening shift. She was in the process of collecting data from the different units on this observation. She also noted a pattern of using float nurses to several units. Prior to this incident, the clinical nurse specialist, Michael Parks, RN, MS, CNS, was consulting with Susan Post and Amy Green about the status of staff education on this unit and what types of resources and training was needed.

Case Study 2: Wrongful Death by Howard Carpenter on Behalf of Wilma Carpenter, Deceased

People Involved in Case:

Mrs. Wilma Carpenter — patient, deceased

Mr. Howard Carpenter — husband and plaintiff in wrongful death suit

Mrs. Scale, RN, MS — nursing supervisor

Elizabeth Adelman, RN — recovery room nurse

Richard Washington, MD — orthopedic surgeon

Judy Gouda, RN, NP

Joseph Alsoff, LPN — post-surgical unit nurse

Kelly Wheeler, RN — post-surgical unit nurse

David Casler, LRT

Susan Post, JD — risk manager

Amy Green — quality assurance

Michael Parks, RN, MS, CNS — education coordinator

Caring Memorial Hospital

Facts:

The plaintiff, Mrs. Carpenter, was a 55-year-old woman who underwent a total hip replacement at Caring Memorial Hospital. The physician was Richard Washington, MD. Dr. Washington is an orthopedic surgeon. His nurse practitioner is Judy Gouda, RN, NP. Dr. Washington reviewed the consent with Mrs. Carpenter prior to surgery. Joseph Alsoff, LPN, witnessed the consent and Mr. Carpenter was present. Joseph does not remember the doctor ever mentioning that death could be a result of the surgery. The recovery room nurse is Elizabeth Adelman, RN. The respiratory therapist is David Casler, LRT. The nurse on the post-surgical unit was Kelly Wheeler, RN. The supervising nurse was Mrs. Scale, RN, MS.

The patient had an epidural catheter for a post-operative pain management following an episode of hypotension in the recovery room which was treated with Ephedrine. Judy Gouda made rounds on the patient in the recovery room after the hypotensive event and vital signs were stable. The patient, Mrs. Carpenter, was placed on a medical surgical nursing unit with the epidural. The nurse, Kelly, was assigned to the patient and had not worked on that unit before, but had worked in post-acute critical care units. The nurse’s assignment was to provide patient care on the entire floor for that shift. There was also an LPN, Joseph, on the unit. It was a busy day on the unit. Mrs. Carpenter was not the only post-operative patient.

Kelly assessed the plaintiff upon admission, checked the IVs, asked if the patient was in pain, noted that the patient was responsive and understood where she was, and was stable. She then left to care for other patients.

The licensed practical nurse, Joseph Alcoff, had been working on the unit for several years. It had been rumored that Joseph was an alcoholic. There was no evidence that he had been drinking on the unit. Approximately an hour after the patient arrived on the unit, she was unable to tolerate respiratory therapy that was ordered and she became nauseated and vomited. David Casler administered the respiratory therapy. According to Kelly, the registered nurse, 10 minutes after the vomiting episode, Joseph Alcoff, the LPN, found the patient blue and unresponsive and called a code. Joseph is the only person other than the physician that carries his own liability insurance. The hospital also has malpractice insurance.

The code team responded, along with Kelly, the registered nurse. Mrs. Carpenter was intubated and cardiac resuscitation was initiated. The patient responded to resuscitative efforts and she was transferred to the intensive care unit. Subsequently, Mrs. Carpenter did not do well, was unresponsive, and declared brain dead and taken off the respirator. She did not have a DNR in place.

There is a conflict in testimony between Joseph the LPN and Kelly the RN. Joseph indicated that Kelly found the plaintiff to be unresponsive after the vomiting episode and called the code. The record is not clear as to when the vital signs and epidural site were assessed. Kelly said she did a motor and sensory level assessment and they were fine — it is not charted though. The time elapsed between the vomiting episode and finding the patient is in dispute. The final diagnosis was anoxia encephalopathy due to the time lapse between CPR being initiated. The patient was eventually extubated, breathed independently for a period of time, and then subsequently expired.

The vital signs ordered by the physician were hourly. The hypotensive episode in the recovery room had not been reported to the registered nurse.

The risk manager is Susan Post, JD, who works in collaboration with the quality assurance director Amy Green. Amy had noted when doing chart reviews over the last 3 months prior to this incident that the vital signs taken in the recovery room were not charted, not done, or not reported to the units. She was in the process of collecting data from the different units on this observation. She also noted a pattern of using float nurses to several postoperative units. Prior to this incident, the clinical nurse specialist, Michael Parks, RN, MS, CNS, was consulting with Susan Post and Amy Green about the status of staff education on these units and what types of resources and training was needed.

Assignment Requirements:

Before finalizing your work, you should:

be sure to read the Assignment description carefully (as displayed above);

consult the Grading Rubric (under the Course Home) to make sure you have included everything necessary; and

utilize spelling and grammar check to minimize errors.

Your writing Assignment should:

follow the conventions of Standard American English (correct grammar, punctuation, etc.);

be well ordered , logical, and unified , as well as original and insightful ;

display superior content, organization, style, and mechanics ; and

use APA 6th Edition format as outlined in the APA Progression Ladder.

How to Submit:

Submit your Assignment to the unit Dropbox before midnight on the last day of the unit.

When you are ready to submit your Assignment, click the Dropbox tab and select this unit’s basket from the dropdown menu, then attach your file. Make sure to save a copy of your work and be sure to confirm that your file uploaded correctly.