Mr. Ben Inouye V. Howard Black Summary

Introduction of Case This is the case of Mr. Ben Inouye v. Dr. Howard Black. Mr. Inouye was involved in a motor vehicle accident in which he suffered a cervical vertebrae injury which, if uncorrected, left him at risk for paralysis. Dr. Black, a neurosurgeon, performed a surgical procedure on Mr. Inouye which involved placing a stainless steel wire which was expected to ultimately break but not expected to cause any physical damage. Two years after the operation, X-rays showed the wire had broken into smaller than expected pieces and one piece had lodged itself within the lower spine within the dura and the sheath encasing the spinal cord. Mr. Inouye required further surgery for removal of the wire fragments and he brought this suit alleging medical malpractice.
Identification of Legal Issue …show more content…
Inouye alleges medical malpractice against Dr. Black. In order for malpractice to be warranted, there must be clear violation of duty, deviation from the standard of care, direct causation and damages. The plaintiff argued that Dr. Black violated his duty and deviated from the standard of care which was the direct cause of the resulting damages of the surgery.
Identification of Ethical Issue The ethical issue brought forth in this case is one regarding nonmaleficence. Nonmaleficence is the principle that enforces the trust and accountability of causing no harm to the patient. As stated in the document, the wire implanted by Dr. Black was expected to break but cause no harm towards the patient. If there was any thought that the wire may cause damage after the expected break, Dr. Black should not perform the surgery on Mr. Inouye.