Quiz 3 Study Guide Example Questions Flashcards
Why should hospitals have direct duties to patients for the overall quality of care?
Institutional responsibility for patient safety; oversight of medical staff qualifications; responsibility to implement safety systems; ability to monitor clinical care through nursing staff; position to establish and enforce standards of care.
In Darling v. Charleston Community Memorial Hospital, what was the basis for finding the hospital negligent?
Failure to recognize gangrene signs; inadequate evaluation of physician qualifications; failure to intervene when problems arose; establishing direct institutional liability to patients beyond just employing staff.
What does Thompson add to Darling’s discussion of the scope of corporate negligence?
Expanded corporate negligence beyond staff credentialing; established additional hospital duties to patients; recognized hospitals’ complex administrative role; addressed balance of liability between physicians and institutions.
In Washington v. Washington Hospital Center, what was the issue regarding carbon dioxide monitors?
Whether they were standard equipment; whether hospitals should adopt emerging technologies; if expert testimony was necessary; whether lay jurors could evaluate care standards; hospital liability during transitions to new safety standards.
What was the court’s approach to Lakeview Medical’s “materially misleading” letter in the Kadlec case?
Treated as standard employment case; ignored healthcare’s special fiduciary nature; failed to consider patient risks; didn’t establish special rules for healthcare employment disclosures; limited liability for potentially dangerous referrals.
Why did the California Supreme Court in Arato v. Avedon refuse to require physicians to disclose life expectancy to patients?
Physician flexibility in difficult disclosures; concerns about statistical reliability; applying existing Cobbs analysis; patient responsibility to ask questions; reluctance to expand therapeutic privilege.
What are the key differences between allowing a patient to die and physician-assisted suicide?
Natural vs. intervention-caused death; different legal status; religious/ethical distinctions regarding active vs. passive measures; different physician roles; distinct implications for medical standards.
Why did the Canterbury court reject the professional standard of disclosure?
Prioritized patient autonomy; recognized patients’ decision-making rights; established patient-centered disclosure standards; implemented “materiality” standard based on patient needs; rejected physician-centered approach.
How are providers to know whether a risk should be deemed “material” according to Canterbury?
What reasonable patients would want to know; severity of potential harm; probability of occurrence; availability of alternatives; potential impact on treatment decisions; case-by-case determination.
What was the key issue in In re Baby K regarding EMTALA?
EMTALA’s application to anencephalic infants; medical futility vs. legal requirements; parental authority vs. professional judgment; resource allocation considerations; defining “emergency medical condition.”
What are the competing interests in frozen embryo disputes like Litowitz v. Litowitz?
Right to procreate vs. right to avoid procreation; applicability of reproductive rights to ART; contract enforcement vs. constitutional rights; embryo disposition when parents disagree; interests of potential future children.
What ethical issues arise regarding gamete donors and disclosure to offspring?
Donor privacy vs. offspring’s right to know; determining appropriate disclosure information; ethics of payment; children’s rights to genetic information; international regulatory differences.
Why has medically assisted dying engendered such passion over the last several decades?
Medicine’s purpose; religious/ethical perspectives; autonomy concerns; tension between caring vs. curing; vulnerable population protection; shifting cultural attitudes toward death.
What concerns arise regarding judicial recusal in bioethics cases?
Impartiality with religious/organizational affiliations; balancing personal beliefs with legal duty; membership in advocacy organizations; different standards for religious vs. political affiliations; special considerations for controversial bioethical issues.
