Case Study Of Chapter 8: Legal Considerations In Sports Medicine
In chapter 8, “Legal Considerations in Sports Medicine”, the text discusses the potential legal issues that athletic trainers can run into and how to best avoid these issues. Some situations are unforeseeable but the text provides the most important information on how to best legally practice athletic training.
Case Study 1- Question 1: “What legal principles are involved in this case? How do they apply? Does James have a strong case? Why or why not?” Between tort and negligence, negligence may have occurred in this case. According to the text negligence is, “a type of tort in which an athletic trainer fails to act as a reasonably prudent athletic trainer would under the circumstances.” A medical professional must also be found guilty of …show more content…
omission or commission and negligence’s five components: conduct, duty, breach of duty, causation, and damage. In this case I don’t think Larry will be found negligible. Commission, performing an act that shouldn’t have been performed, could apply because Larry may have lied about James’ condition but first lying has to be considered an action. Second, not all five of the components can be proven or stand true in this case. I don’t believe James has a strong case because he and Rich were both intoxicated when they had their conversation, and this conversation is James’ only piece of evidence that he has.
Question 3: Who, if anyone, is at fault in this case? If more than one person is at fault, how is a judge or jury likely to determine the percentage of each person’s liability?” I don’t believe that anyone is at fault in this case. Rich didn’t break HIPAA because he shared information about James with James. The only possibility of someone being at fault is if James is right about the medical team and coaches concealing his true nature of injury. If this is the case, then I would say that the Larry and the coach share liability because they lied about James’ true condition. Unless other prudent medical professionals agree with Larry’s decision to conceal the information about James then negligence may have occurred.
Question 4: “What records could Larry use to defend himself and the team?” Larry could use any medical and history records that he has on James to prove the condition that he was in when the conversation took place. Coaches notes or records could also be used to prove that the decision they made was an authentic one and not based on the conversation that took place.
Case Study 2- Question 1: “What legal principles are involved in this case? What liability concerns should be addressed? What policies and procedures should be implemented to address these concerns?” In this case negligence and most of its five components are involved.
According to the text negligence is, “a type of tort in which an athletic trainer fails to act as a reasonably prudent athletic trainer would under the circumstances.” In this situation, Christine was negligent through omission, meaning that she failed to do something that an athletic trainer should have done in the situation. Christine should have first asked the athlete if she had ever taken Ibuprophen before and if she had any poor medical reactions to the medication. After asking the athlete, Christine should have referred to the athlete’s records to ensure that the athlete is okay to take Ibuprophen. The omission in this case may be proof of the conduct portion of a negligence claim. Another step in proving negligence is if Christine breached a duty owed to the athlete. The big question is, did Christine exercise the standard of care that other athletic trainers would have performed in this case? If so, then breach of duty won’t contribute to the negligence claim, but if not then it will be. Finally, the easiest determinant of negligence in this case would be damage. Did the breach of duty, if any, cause any harm to the athlete? What we know from the case is that the athlete became violently ill, so therefore the athlete was harmed and I think it is safe to say suffered from damages. These damages would confirm the damage portion of the negligence claim. In this case the physician and Christine would be liable so they could face consequences to any titles that they have towards their names just as certifications or licenses. The school could also face liability issues over this situation. To address these liability concerns there should be some risk management put into place to deal with this case and any future cases. If done well enough these risk management techniques such as avoidance, transference, retention, or reduction should help prevent any future situations. A new policy and procedure
should be put into place that before giving medication to an athlete the athletic trainer must look up their records to ensure it is okay for the athlete to consume this medication. This will help from this situation from reoccurring.
Question 2: “What would you have done differently, if anything, if you had been in Christine’s position?” If I had been in Christine’s case, I would have confirmed with that physician that 800mg of Ibuprophen was an appropriate amount. I would have also asked if the athlete can’t take this medication what can she take instead? Next, I would have asked if the athlete ever had any reactions when taking Ibuprohen and would have checked her medical records to confirm. Finally, before sending the athlete home I would have provided her with signs and symptoms of negative reactions to the medication so that she could be more aware and know what to do in the situation of the negative reaction.
Question 3: “Who, if anyone, is at fault in this case? If more than one person is at fault, how should a judge or jury determine the degree to which each person is liable?” In this case Christine is at fault for not confirming from the athlete or records that it was okay for the athlete to take Ibuprophen. The physician may also be at fault since Christine practices under him/her and they gave the instructions to have the athlete take the 800mg of Ibuprophen. In my opinion, I think that the physician is less liable than Christine because it wasn’t his job to know the patient’s medical history, it was just his job to give instruction. The only reason I see him as somewhat liable is because Christine practices under him. Overall, I think Christine should be given the most liability because she failed to check the athlete’s medical history and records.
Case Study 1- Question 1: “What legal principles are involved in this case? How do they apply? Does James have a strong case? Why or why not?” Between tort and negligence, negligence may have occurred in this case. According to the text negligence is, “a type of tort in which an athletic trainer fails to act as a reasonably prudent athletic trainer would under the circumstances.” A medical professional must also be found guilty of …show more content…
omission or commission and negligence’s five components: conduct, duty, breach of duty, causation, and damage. In this case I don’t think Larry will be found negligible. Commission, performing an act that shouldn’t have been performed, could apply because Larry may have lied about James’ condition but first lying has to be considered an action. Second, not all five of the components can be proven or stand true in this case. I don’t believe James has a strong case because he and Rich were both intoxicated when they had their conversation, and this conversation is James’ only piece of evidence that he has.
Question 3: Who, if anyone, is at fault in this case? If more than one person is at fault, how is a judge or jury likely to determine the percentage of each person’s liability?” I don’t believe that anyone is at fault in this case. Rich didn’t break HIPAA because he shared information about James with James. The only possibility of someone being at fault is if James is right about the medical team and coaches concealing his true nature of injury. If this is the case, then I would say that the Larry and the coach share liability because they lied about James’ true condition. Unless other prudent medical professionals agree with Larry’s decision to conceal the information about James then negligence may have occurred.
Question 4: “What records could Larry use to defend himself and the team?” Larry could use any medical and history records that he has on James to prove the condition that he was in when the conversation took place. Coaches notes or records could also be used to prove that the decision they made was an authentic one and not based on the conversation that took place.
Case Study 2- Question 1: “What legal principles are involved in this case? What liability concerns should be addressed? What policies and procedures should be implemented to address these concerns?” In this case negligence and most of its five components are involved.
According to the text negligence is, “a type of tort in which an athletic trainer fails to act as a reasonably prudent athletic trainer would under the circumstances.” In this situation, Christine was negligent through omission, meaning that she failed to do something that an athletic trainer should have done in the situation. Christine should have first asked the athlete if she had ever taken Ibuprophen before and if she had any poor medical reactions to the medication. After asking the athlete, Christine should have referred to the athlete’s records to ensure that the athlete is okay to take Ibuprophen. The omission in this case may be proof of the conduct portion of a negligence claim. Another step in proving negligence is if Christine breached a duty owed to the athlete. The big question is, did Christine exercise the standard of care that other athletic trainers would have performed in this case? If so, then breach of duty won’t contribute to the negligence claim, but if not then it will be. Finally, the easiest determinant of negligence in this case would be damage. Did the breach of duty, if any, cause any harm to the athlete? What we know from the case is that the athlete became violently ill, so therefore the athlete was harmed and I think it is safe to say suffered from damages. These damages would confirm the damage portion of the negligence claim. In this case the physician and Christine would be liable so they could face consequences to any titles that they have towards their names just as certifications or licenses. The school could also face liability issues over this situation. To address these liability concerns there should be some risk management put into place to deal with this case and any future cases. If done well enough these risk management techniques such as avoidance, transference, retention, or reduction should help prevent any future situations. A new policy and procedure
should be put into place that before giving medication to an athlete the athletic trainer must look up their records to ensure it is okay for the athlete to consume this medication. This will help from this situation from reoccurring.
Question 2: “What would you have done differently, if anything, if you had been in Christine’s position?” If I had been in Christine’s case, I would have confirmed with that physician that 800mg of Ibuprophen was an appropriate amount. I would have also asked if the athlete can’t take this medication what can she take instead? Next, I would have asked if the athlete ever had any reactions when taking Ibuprohen and would have checked her medical records to confirm. Finally, before sending the athlete home I would have provided her with signs and symptoms of negative reactions to the medication so that she could be more aware and know what to do in the situation of the negative reaction.
Question 3: “Who, if anyone, is at fault in this case? If more than one person is at fault, how should a judge or jury determine the degree to which each person is liable?” In this case Christine is at fault for not confirming from the athlete or records that it was okay for the athlete to take Ibuprophen. The physician may also be at fault since Christine practices under him/her and they gave the instructions to have the athlete take the 800mg of Ibuprophen. In my opinion, I think that the physician is less liable than Christine because it wasn’t his job to know the patient’s medical history, it was just his job to give instruction. The only reason I see him as somewhat liable is because Christine practices under him. Overall, I think Christine should be given the most liability because she failed to check the athlete’s medical history and records.