Amputation Mishap; Negligence
Carmen Holder
HCS/478
February 4, 2013
Barbara Gilbert, EdD, MSN, RN, CNE

Amputation Mishap; Negligence
Confused by a repeating dream, Joseph Benson wakes up and realizes the wrong leg was amputated. Even under the best of circumstances, mishaps such as this one do occur as a result of negligence and cause unnecessary duress to patients. This paper will discuss the difference between negligence, gross negligence, and malpractice. I will present my opinion of the article “Amputation Mishap; Negligence” from the Neighborhood newspaper. I will also discuss the importance of documentation as it relates to ethical and legal requirements, and the ethical principles that would guide my practice as a nurse in …show more content…

A medical malpractice suit usually includes everyone involved in the case. It can include the physician, nurses, and the hospital’s board of directors. In this case, I am sure everyone in the operating room was summoned. What happened in this operating room was plain negligence that involved disrespect for the patient, a violation of the standards of care, and caused the patient injury. The damages the patient incurred are not speculative as it is obvious the wrong leg was amputated.
The role of the nurse has changed drastically in the past few decades. The nurse has more responsibilities today than ever before. In the Neighborhood News article, Amputation Mishap, Joseph Benson was scheduled for below the knee amputation of the left leg because of complications of diabetes. He was shocked to discover the wrong leg had been amputated. The Neighborhood article stated the hospital was experiencing problems with the nursing shortage and with the union. There is no administrative problem large enough to justify this mishap. I strongly recognize the hospital as negligent because the medical staff involved in this case failed to perform their duty of do no harm by amputating the wrong leg. The four elements of negligence were clearly breached by everyone because everyone had a legal obligation to protect the patient from harm, and