In regards to the case of Vanessa Anderson’s death the Australian legal system plays an important role in the explaining and elaborating on the importance of an inquest report and the coroner’s court of NSW in addition to this it is possible to use inquest report it is possible to outline the health care delivery services that were involved in Vanessa’s care. Using an example from the inquest report the healthcare concepts of beneficence and non-maleficence can be also be elaborated on.
The Australian legal system is broken into two different sources of law, legislation and common law. Legislation law comes from parliament, parliament enables acts and statutes which has influence over individuals, groups or populations as a whole. Then there …show more content…
While at the RNSH Vanessa was diagnosed by Dr Bakar with having a closed depressed right temporal skull fracture with temporal brain contusions. Dr Bakar also performed a Glasgow coma score test. On the 7th While at the RNSH Vanessa was put on a drug regime of tramadol which was later changed to codeine phosphate. At midday Dr little diagnosed Vanessa with having a mild head injury. After deliberation about anti-convulsant medication Dr little decided to prescribe Dilantin to Vanessa. Dr little, Dr Williams and Nurse Becker also attended to Vanessa in the presence of her mother. After Vanessa’s mother talked to Dr Williams and informed her that Vanessa’s brother has an allergy to Dilantin. Dr Williams in response to Vanessa’s pain prescribed Panadeine forte, 2 tablets four times a day and Endone at 5 mg 6 times a day but did not discuss this drug regime with anyone else. Dr Ismail later increased …show more content…
Beneficence in a healthcare context, is when a healthcare professional has performed an action that is done to provide the most amount of good for the most amount of people, which results in the following action producing the most amount of benefit for those involved. Non maleficence is the action of not inflicting harm onto patients this includes the proper conveyance of information which when not performed may lead to negligence, which is the failure to impose the correct care over a patient. One example that is evident in the inquest report was when Nurse Perrin was attending to Vanessa while she was distressed. Nurse Perrin made several observations concerning breathing, pigmentation and temperature but she also lifted Vanessa arms which limply fell to the bed Nurse Perrin then proceeded to attend to another patient when Perrin returned four minutes later she conducted neurological observations which passed her standards and decided Vanessa was having a bad dream and did not make any formal records. In this example Nurse Perrin did not adhere to the concepts of beneficence and non-maleficence. The inquest report states that in hindsight it would have been beneficent if Nurse Perrin had performed a GCS examination as it would have shown Vanessa to have been at a standard in which emergency care would be necessary.
The Australian legal system is broken into two different sources of law, legislation and common law. Legislation law comes from parliament, parliament enables acts and statutes which has influence over individuals, groups or populations as a whole. Then there …show more content…
While at the RNSH Vanessa was diagnosed by Dr Bakar with having a closed depressed right temporal skull fracture with temporal brain contusions. Dr Bakar also performed a Glasgow coma score test. On the 7th While at the RNSH Vanessa was put on a drug regime of tramadol which was later changed to codeine phosphate. At midday Dr little diagnosed Vanessa with having a mild head injury. After deliberation about anti-convulsant medication Dr little decided to prescribe Dilantin to Vanessa. Dr little, Dr Williams and Nurse Becker also attended to Vanessa in the presence of her mother. After Vanessa’s mother talked to Dr Williams and informed her that Vanessa’s brother has an allergy to Dilantin. Dr Williams in response to Vanessa’s pain prescribed Panadeine forte, 2 tablets four times a day and Endone at 5 mg 6 times a day but did not discuss this drug regime with anyone else. Dr Ismail later increased …show more content…
Beneficence in a healthcare context, is when a healthcare professional has performed an action that is done to provide the most amount of good for the most amount of people, which results in the following action producing the most amount of benefit for those involved. Non maleficence is the action of not inflicting harm onto patients this includes the proper conveyance of information which when not performed may lead to negligence, which is the failure to impose the correct care over a patient. One example that is evident in the inquest report was when Nurse Perrin was attending to Vanessa while she was distressed. Nurse Perrin made several observations concerning breathing, pigmentation and temperature but she also lifted Vanessa arms which limply fell to the bed Nurse Perrin then proceeded to attend to another patient when Perrin returned four minutes later she conducted neurological observations which passed her standards and decided Vanessa was having a bad dream and did not make any formal records. In this example Nurse Perrin did not adhere to the concepts of beneficence and non-maleficence. The inquest report states that in hindsight it would have been beneficent if Nurse Perrin had performed a GCS examination as it would have shown Vanessa to have been at a standard in which emergency care would be necessary.