Women, thinking you control your own vaginas. Heh. This ties in nicely with the thread about MI coercing couples to get married.This is the United States of America.
You know....that beacon of freedom for the entire world.
That bastion of excellence in everything. The country that likes to think it sets the standard.
So you might think that when you go to a medically-trained doctor or nurse seeking to have your IUD adjusted, the fact that they were trained and certified as medical professionals in a field with clear standards and the fact that you live in a democracy that prides itself on leading the world in human rights (or used to) your wish simply to have the small problem you are experiencing with your IUD fixed would be respected.
You might be wrong.
Now, apparently, nurses and doctors feel empowered to decide for you whether contraceptives are ok, which ones, if any, you are allowed to use, and when you will stop using them irrespective of your wishes. Not because of any medical reason. Just because that particular provider does not like that particular method. Or any method of contraception. Or maybe anything having to do with sex or sexuality. It's enough that s/he just does not like your choices.
This kind of situation has been much-discussed as a potential outcome of the new HHS rule to go into effect on Monday, January 19th. But possibility and reality have already collided head-on in the story of a New Mexico woman whose IUD was removed by a nurse against the woman's wishes and who is now suing both the nurse and the center in federal court for battery, constitutional violations and negligence.
The patient went to the Presbyterian Health Services Rio Rancho Family Health Center in Rio Rancho, New Mexico, and saw nurse practitioner Sylvia Olona. Her request: Simply to shorten the strings on her IUD for greater comfort.
The result? Nurse Olona took it upon herself to remove the troublesome device. Why? Simple, Nurse Olona told her patient:
"Having the IUD come out was a good thing [because] I personally do not like IUDs. I feel they are a type of abortion. I don't know how you feel about abortion, but I am against them. ...What the IUD does is take the fertilized egg and pushes it out of the uterus."
Hmmmm....funny....I don't think they teach this definition of abortion in medical or nursing school. But in the free-for-all, define-your-own-medical-practice era of reproductive politics of the past 8 years, anything apparently goes. Nurse Olona could instead, with respect for herself and her patient, easily have said "I can't help you with your IUD as I am uncomfortable with this form of contraception, but let me get you someone who can."
But no. The patient's own choices became the subject of a morality play inside the walls of Rio Rancho. The federal complaint states:
"As soon as Defendant Olona began speaking to (the plaintiff), she questioned her about her choice of contraception.
"As Defendant Olona began the procedure, (the plaintiff) felt Olona pull on the strings of the IUD. (The plaintiff) felt a distinct pulling on the strings followed by a sharp pain in her uterus similar to a very strong menstrual cramp.
"As that happened, Defendant Olona stated, 'Uh oh, I accidentally pulled out your IUD. I gently tugged and out it came.' She then explained, 'I cut the string than went back and gently pulled and out it came. It must have not been in properly.'
In true Britney Spears' "oops I did it again" style, Nurse Olona stated:
'Everyone in the office always laughs and tells me I pull these out on purpose because I am against them, but it's not true, they accidentally come out when I tug.'
Nurse Olona, don't be so coy....! Just repeat what you told your patient:
"Defendant Olona told (the plaintiff) that it was better that she did not have the IUD because she could now use a "non-abortion" form of contraception. Defendant Olona suggested the deprovera (depo) [sic] shot or the pill, and made clear that she would not insert a new IUD."
As noted by Cristina Page today, and has been extensively documented elsewhere on Reality Check, unless we get a quick injunction against the recently formalized and nonsensically named HHS "provider conscience rule," these types of stories may become more and more frequent.
But what worries me is that this is happening now. Before the HHS rule is actually in effect. And may be happening frequently, with or without provider conscience rules, under the radar screen. What this suggests to me is that even once we get rid of the new HHS rule--and we are all depending on the new Administration to do this as quickly as possible even with an unjunction--we need a new strategy, one which new HHS Secretary Daschle and the new Surgeon General must take on as soon as possible....issuing or re-issuing clear guidance to all medical and nursing professionals about the science and medical definitions of contraceptives and abortion; about the fact that contraception is not abortion and that contraception reduces unintended pregnancy and the need for abortion; about the fact that abortion is legal in the United States of America; and finally that patients rights to privacy and informed choice and consent still mean something in this country. Finally, we need a public discussion about the limits of power of individual medical practitioners to take women's reproductive lives into their own hands.
Getting rid of the new rule won't be enough. Some people already are not playing by the rules.
NM nurse removing birth control without patients consent
Moderators: Alyrium Denryle, Edi, K. A. Pital
NM nurse removing birth control without patients consent
linka
بيرني كان سيفوز
*
Nuclear Navy Warwolf
*
in omnibus requiem quaesivi, et nusquam inveni nisi in angulo cum libro
*
ipsa scientia potestas est
*
Nuclear Navy Warwolf
*
in omnibus requiem quaesivi, et nusquam inveni nisi in angulo cum libro
*
ipsa scientia potestas est
- General Zod
- Never Shuts Up
- Posts: 29211
- Joined: 2003-11-18 03:08pm
- Location: The Clearance Rack
- Contact:
Re: NM nurse removing birth control without patients consent
Wow, if this isn't a class action lawsuit in the making I don't know what is.
"It's you Americans. There's something about nipples you hate. If this were Germany, we'd be romping around naked on the stage here."
Re: NM nurse removing birth control without patients consent
Class action lawsuit at the minimum. Couldn't you also hit them with criminal charges?
I've been asked why I still follow a few of the people I know on Facebook with 'interesting political habits and view points'.
It's so when they comment on or approve of something, I know what pages to block/what not to vote for.
It's so when they comment on or approve of something, I know what pages to block/what not to vote for.
- General Zod
- Never Shuts Up
- Posts: 29211
- Joined: 2003-11-18 03:08pm
- Location: The Clearance Rack
- Contact:
Re: NM nurse removing birth control without patients consent
What would you charge them with? I don't think there's a whole lot of precedent for this type of behavior for criminal grounds, although the most I could possibly see is negligence, maybe reckless endangerment if you wanted to stretch things.Solauren wrote:Class action lawsuit at the minimum. Couldn't you also hit them with criminal charges?
"It's you Americans. There's something about nipples you hate. If this were Germany, we'd be romping around naked on the stage here."
Re: NM nurse removing birth control without patients consent
I would also believe that you could get a battery at minimum, simply from the unconsented contact that an ordinary person would find offensive.General Zod wrote:What would you charge them with? I don't think there's a whole lot of precedent for this type of behavior for criminal grounds, although the most I could possibly see is negligence, maybe reckless endangerment if you wanted to stretch things.Solauren wrote:Class action lawsuit at the minimum. Couldn't you also hit them with criminal charges?
"Impossible! Lasers can't even harm out deflector dish! Clearly these foes are masters of illusion!' 'But sir, my console says we-' 'MASTERS OF ILLUSION! - General Schatten
Re: NM nurse removing birth control without patients consent
At the very minimum that bitch Olona needs to lose her professional license permanently and get blacklisted. Something like this happening here would mean the person guilty of such a breach of professional ethics would never work in the healthcare industry again.
Warwolf Urban Combat Specialist
Why is it so goddamned hard to get little assholes like you to admit it when you fuck up? Is it pride? What gives you the right to have any pride?
–Darth Wong to vivftp
GOP message? Why don't they just come out of the closet: FASCISTS R' US –Patrick Degan
The GOP has a problem with anyone coming out of the closet. –18-till-I-die
Why is it so goddamned hard to get little assholes like you to admit it when you fuck up? Is it pride? What gives you the right to have any pride?
–Darth Wong to vivftp
GOP message? Why don't they just come out of the closet: FASCISTS R' US –Patrick Degan
The GOP has a problem with anyone coming out of the closet. –18-till-I-die
- Darth Wong
- Sith Lord
- Posts: 70028
- Joined: 2002-07-03 12:25am
- Location: Toronto, Canada
- Contact:
Re: NM nurse removing birth control without patients consent
Unfortunately, I don't think anyone in America cares about "professional ethics", at least not in comparison to "religious beliefs". Even among most people who call themselves "moderates". religious beliefs are assumed to trump everything else.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/29770/297706b92741c0128e679c0602271eb2cbf77447" alt="Image"
"you guys are fascinated with the use of those "rules of logic" to the extent that you don't really want to discussus anything."- GC
"I do not believe Russian Roulette is a stupid act" - Embracer of Darkness
"Viagra commercials appear to save lives" - tharkûn on US health care.
http://www.stardestroyer.net/Mike/RantMode/Blurbs.html
Re: NM nurse removing birth control without patients consent
Wow, talk about painting with a broad brush... this is right up there with "all Muslims are terrorists" and "you're either with us or against us."Darth Wong wrote:Unfortunately, I don't think anyone in America cares about "professional ethics", at least not in comparison to "religious beliefs". Even among most people who call themselves "moderates". religious beliefs are assumed to trump everything else.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/967e0/967e0233782ffabb85b7b424fa95de2488529386" alt="Rolling Eyes :roll:"
In Brazil they say that Pele was the best, but Garrincha was better
- Flagg
- CUNTS FOR EYES!
- Posts: 12797
- Joined: 2005-06-09 09:56pm
- Location: Hell. In The Room Right Next to Reagan. He's Fucking Bonzo. No, wait... Bonzo's fucking HIM.
Re: NM nurse removing birth control without patients consent
Poetic justice would be to force this bitch to pay child support for every "accident" she caused.
We pissing our pants yet?
-Negan
You got your shittin' pants on? Because you’re about to Shit. Your. Pants!
-Negan
He who can, does; he who cannot, teaches.
-George Bernard Shaw
-Negan
You got your shittin' pants on? Because you’re about to Shit. Your. Pants!
-Negan
He who can, does; he who cannot, teaches.
-George Bernard Shaw
- SirNitram
- Rest in Peace, Black Mage
- Posts: 28367
- Joined: 2002-07-03 04:48pm
- Location: Somewhere between nowhere and everywhere
Re: NM nurse removing birth control without patients consent
Those thinking this can be sued should check the bit where Bush legalized any medical worker.. From head surgeon to billing guy.. From reprecussion for antics regarding any and all acts they find 'objectionable' on moral grounds. I suspect any attempt for justice will run headlong into that.
Manic Progressive: A liberal who violently swings from anger at politicos to despondency over them.
Out Of Context theatre: Ron Paul has repeatedly said he's not a racist. - Destructinator XIII on why Ron Paul isn't racist.
Shadowy Overlord - BMs/Black Mage Monkey - BOTM/Jetfire - Cybertron's Finest/General Miscreant/ASVS/Supermoderator Emeritus
Debator Classification: Trollhunter
Out Of Context theatre: Ron Paul has repeatedly said he's not a racist. - Destructinator XIII on why Ron Paul isn't racist.
Shadowy Overlord - BMs/Black Mage Monkey - BOTM/Jetfire - Cybertron's Finest/General Miscreant/ASVS/Supermoderator Emeritus
Debator Classification: Trollhunter
Re: NM nurse removing birth control without patients consent
That doesn't prevent a lawsuit, however. It just means that any lawsuit would have to attempt to overturn this before a decision could be made on the validity of the lawsuit. While very few individuals are likely to fund such a lawsuit, plenty of attorneys looking for a big payday would be happy to take this on as a class-action lawsuit.SirNitram wrote:Those thinking this can be sued should check the bit where Bush legalized any medical worker.. From head surgeon to billing guy.. From reprecussion for antics regarding any and all acts they find 'objectionable' on moral grounds. I suspect any attempt for justice will run headlong into that.
This one might be interesting to watch if it goes anywhere.
In Brazil they say that Pele was the best, but Garrincha was better
- Darth Wong
- Sith Lord
- Posts: 70028
- Joined: 2002-07-03 12:25am
- Location: Toronto, Canada
- Contact:
Re: NM nurse removing birth control without patients consent
Bullshit. It's a completely justifiable claim that religious beliefs trump professional ethics in America. Medical professionals are allowed to refuse to do their jobs without penalty if their religious beliefs tell them to, and there is no real backlash against this. How the fuck is this "painting with a broad brush?"SancheztheWhaler wrote:Wow, talk about painting with a broad brush... this is right up there with "all Muslims are terrorists" and "you're either with us or against us."Darth Wong wrote:Unfortunately, I don't think anyone in America cares about "professional ethics", at least not in comparison to "religious beliefs". Even among most people who call themselves "moderates". religious beliefs are assumed to trump everything else.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/29770/297706b92741c0128e679c0602271eb2cbf77447" alt="Image"
"you guys are fascinated with the use of those "rules of logic" to the extent that you don't really want to discussus anything."- GC
"I do not believe Russian Roulette is a stupid act" - Embracer of Darkness
"Viagra commercials appear to save lives" - tharkûn on US health care.
http://www.stardestroyer.net/Mike/RantMode/Blurbs.html
-
- Sith Acolyte
- Posts: 6464
- Joined: 2007-09-14 11:46pm
- Location: SoCal
Re: NM nurse removing birth control without patients consent
If those pharmacists who got this whole ball rolling with their refusals to fill prescriptions had been professionally ruined and sued in a public, high-profile sort of way when this BS first began, I doubt people in the medical field would be so willing to pull this kind of unconscionable crap, today.
I find myself endlessly fascinated by your career - Stark, in a fit of Nerd-Validation, November 3, 2011
Re: NM nurse removing birth control without patients consent
Someone should go through the office records and see if this woman gets it arranged for herself to do work more often than other nurses in the office on women with IUDs. If she has then a case should be made that she is doing this intentionally and seeking out opportunities. If the entire office has a running joke that she does this more than anyone else then obviously there is a trend that bears investigating.
I KILL YOU!!!
- Sea Skimmer
- Yankee Capitalist Air Pirate
- Posts: 37390
- Joined: 2002-07-03 11:49pm
- Location: Passchendaele City, HAB
Re: NM nurse removing birth control without patients consent
How can you make such a claim when you have no real idea at all how many plaintiffs might be involved with this particular medical facility? Gaining class action status BTW, is not always to the advantage of the plaintiff, far from it since normally denies each plaintiff the ability to have the specifics of there case heard.Solauren wrote:Class action lawsuit at the minimum. Couldn't you also hit them with criminal charges?
"This cult of special forces is as sensible as to form a Royal Corps of Tree Climbers and say that no soldier who does not wear its green hat with a bunch of oak leaves stuck in it should be expected to climb a tree"
— Field Marshal William Slim 1956
— Field Marshal William Slim 1956
- General Zod
- Never Shuts Up
- Posts: 29211
- Joined: 2003-11-18 03:08pm
- Location: The Clearance Rack
- Contact:
Re: NM nurse removing birth control without patients consent
On the other hand a class action is far more likely to result in sweeping institutional policy change than an individual lawsuit. Which is really what's needed here rather than individual redress.Sea Skimmer wrote:How can you make such a claim when you have no real idea at all how many plaintiffs might be involved with this particular medical facility? Gaining class action status BTW, is not always to the advantage of the plaintiff, far from it since normally denies each plaintiff the ability to have the specifics of there case heard.
"It's you Americans. There's something about nipples you hate. If this were Germany, we'd be romping around naked on the stage here."
Re: NM nurse removing birth control without patients consent
That rule actually hasn't gone into effect, based on what I'm reading in other articles, and it may not now that Obama has taken office.SirNitram wrote:Those thinking this can be sued should check the bit where Bush legalized any medical worker.. From head surgeon to billing guy.. From reprecussion for antics regarding any and all acts they find 'objectionable' on moral grounds. I suspect any attempt for justice will run headlong into that.
"This is supposed to be a happy occasion... Let's not bicker and argue about who killed who."
-- The King of Swamp Castle, Monty Python and the Holy Grail
"Nothing of consequence happened today. " -- Diary of King George III, July 4, 1776
"This is not bad; this is a conspiracy to remove happiness from existence. It seeks to wrap its hedgehog hand around the still beating heart of the personification of good and squeeze until it is stilled."
-- Chuck Sonnenburg on Voyager's "Elogium"
-- The King of Swamp Castle, Monty Python and the Holy Grail
"Nothing of consequence happened today. " -- Diary of King George III, July 4, 1776
"This is not bad; this is a conspiracy to remove happiness from existence. It seeks to wrap its hedgehog hand around the still beating heart of the personification of good and squeeze until it is stilled."
-- Chuck Sonnenburg on Voyager's "Elogium"
- Alyrium Denryle
- Minister of Sin
- Posts: 22224
- Joined: 2002-07-11 08:34pm
- Location: The Deep Desert
- Contact:
Re: NM nurse removing birth control without patients consent
Moreover this was not refusing care. It was battery. She is performing procedures without the informed consent of her patients.
Nurse Practitioners are essentially GPs in all but title, with a little bit less liability. If she cant shorten IUD strings competently she never should have been allowed to perform the procedure, and if she has a string of doing this, it is not a string of accidents. It is intent.
Legally it is a clear cut case of battery.What would you charge them with? I don't think there's a whole lot of precedent for this type of behavior for criminal grounds, although the most I could possibly see is negligence, maybe reckless endangerment if you wanted to stretch things.
As a Nurse practitioner she in all likelyhood runs the office, unless I missed something.Someone should go through the office records and see if this woman gets it arranged for herself to do work more often than other nurses in the office on women with IUDs. If she has then a case should be made that she is doing this intentionally and seeking out opportunities. If the entire office has a running joke that she does this more than anyone else then obviously there is a trend that bears investigating.
Nurse Practitioners are essentially GPs in all but title, with a little bit less liability. If she cant shorten IUD strings competently she never should have been allowed to perform the procedure, and if she has a string of doing this, it is not a string of accidents. It is intent.
GALE Force Biological Agent/
BOTM/Great Dolphin Conspiracy/
Entomology and Evolutionary Biology Subdirector:SD.net Dept. of Biological Sciences
There is Grandeur in the View of Life; it fills me with a Deep Wonder, and Intense Cynicism.
Factio republicanum delenda est
BOTM/Great Dolphin Conspiracy/
Entomology and Evolutionary Biology Subdirector:SD.net Dept. of Biological Sciences
There is Grandeur in the View of Life; it fills me with a Deep Wonder, and Intense Cynicism.
Factio republicanum delenda est
-
- Sith Acolyte
- Posts: 6464
- Joined: 2007-09-14 11:46pm
- Location: SoCal
Re: NM nurse removing birth control without patients consent
I wonder if she could be held civilly liable for the expenses associated with raising an unplanned child conceived as direct result of her tampering with patients' IUDs (assuming that she removed any without informing the patient that it hadn't been replaced).
I find myself endlessly fascinated by your career - Stark, in a fit of Nerd-Validation, November 3, 2011
- Kamakazie Sith
- Emperor's Hand
- Posts: 7555
- Joined: 2002-07-03 05:00pm
- Location: Salt Lake City, Utah
Re: NM nurse removing birth control without patients consent
If that passed it wouldn't hold up with this person because she withheld critical information from her client.SirNitram wrote:Those thinking this can be sued should check the bit where Bush legalized any medical worker.. From head surgeon to billing guy.. From reprecussion for antics regarding any and all acts they find 'objectionable' on moral grounds. I suspect any attempt for justice will run headlong into that.
Milites Astrum Exterminans
Re: NM nurse removing birth control without patients consent
If I was the scumbag defendant's lawyer, I would argue that the plaintiff should have mitigated the damage by getting an abortion. And that would piss off just about everyone in the courtroom.Kanastrous wrote:I wonder if she could be held civilly liable for the expenses associated with raising an unplanned child conceived as direct result of her tampering with patients' IUDs (assuming that she removed any without informing the patient that it hadn't been replaced).
In Soviet Union, God created Man - Yakov Smirnoff
-
- Sith Acolyte
- Posts: 6464
- Joined: 2007-09-14 11:46pm
- Location: SoCal
Re: NM nurse removing birth control without patients consent
I should think the counter-argument is that the plaintiff's willingness to use an IUD to avoid conception, does not imply that she was willing to resort to abortion once pregnant.
I find myself endlessly fascinated by your career - Stark, in a fit of Nerd-Validation, November 3, 2011
- RedImperator
- Roosevelt Republican
- Posts: 16465
- Joined: 2002-07-11 07:59pm
- Location: Delaware
- Contact:
Re: NM nurse removing birth control without patients consent
So, like, is there anyone in this thread who actually knows anything about civil or criminal law commenting on the civil and/or criminal liabilities of the nurse in question? "Clear cut case of battery"--really? Okay, which New Mexico statute did she violate? "Class action lawsuit at the minimum"--where's the evidence a class-action case is possible? I don't doubt that there's a potential lawsuit here, and that laws were probably violated (certainly professional ethics were), but it would be nice if people could bring some evidence to the table when they play amateur lawyer.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/eeaef/eeaef665cbb33e592b648ff7493cd333a80f75d6" alt="Image"
X-Ray Blues
- Alyrium Denryle
- Minister of Sin
- Posts: 22224
- Joined: 2002-07-11 08:34pm
- Location: The Deep Desert
- Contact:
Re: NM nurse removing birth control without patients consent
Definite case of some sort of Fraud seeing as she misrepresented herself as performing another procedure.RedImperator wrote:So, like, is there anyone in this thread who actually knows anything about civil or criminal law commenting on the civil and/or criminal liabilities of the nurse in question? "Clear cut case of battery"--really? Okay, which New Mexico statute did she violate? "Class action lawsuit at the minimum"--where's the evidence a class-action case is possible? I don't doubt that there's a potential lawsuit here, and that laws were probably violated (certainly professional ethics were), but it would be nice if people could bring some evidence to the table when they play amateur lawyer.
30-16-6. Fraud.
30-16-1. Larceny.A. Fraud consists of the intentional misappropriation or taking of anything of value that belongs to another by means of fraudulent conduct, practices or representations.
B. Whoever commits fraud when the value of the property misappropriated or taken is two hundred fifty dollars ($250) or less is guilty of a petty misdemeanor.
C. Whoever commits fraud when the value of the property misappropriated or taken is over two hundred fifty dollars ($250) but not more than five hundred dollars ($500) is guilty of a misdemeanor.
D. Whoever commits fraud when the value of the property misappropriated or taken is over five hundred dollars ($500) but not more than two thousand five hundred dollars ($2,500) is guilty of a fourth degree felony.
E. Whoever commits fraud when the value of the property misappropriated or taken is over two thousand five hundred dollars ($2,500) but not more than twenty thousand dollars ($20,000) is guilty of a third degree felony.
F. Whoever commits fraud when the value of the property misappropriated or taken exceeds twenty thousand dollars ($20,000) is guilty of a second degree felony.
G. Whoever commits fraud when the property misappropriated or taken is a firearm that is valued at less than two thousand five hundred dollars ($2,500) is guilty of a fourth degree felony.
Could count as felony Larceny depending on how much it costs to have An IUD put in.A. Larceny consists of the stealing of anything of value that belongs to another.
B. Whoever commits larceny when the value of the property stolen is two hundred fifty dollars ($250) or less is guilty of a petty misdemeanor.
C. Whoever commits larceny when the value of the property stolen is over two hundred fifty dollars ($250) but not more than five hundred dollars ($500) is guilty of a misdemeanor.
D. Whoever commits larceny when the value of the property stolen is over five hundred dollars ($500) but not more than two thousand five hundred dollars ($2,500) is guilty of a fourth degree felony.
E. Whoever commits larceny when the value of the property stolen is over two thousand five hundred dollars ($2,500) but not more than twenty thousand dollars ($20,000) is guilty of a third degree felony.
F. Whoever commits larceny when the value of the property stolen is over twenty thousand dollars ($20,000) is guilty of a second degree felony.
G. Whoever commits larceny when the property of value stolen is livestock is guilty of a third degree felony regardless of its value.
H. Whoever commits larceny when the property of value stolen is a firearm is guilty of a fourth degree felony when its value is less than two thousand five hundred dollars ($2,500).
30-3-4. Battery.
Could count as aggravated batter (depending)Battery is the unlawful, intentional touching or application of force to the person of another, when done in a rude, insolent or angry manner.
30-3-5. Aggravated battery.
I would count removing someone's birth control without consent as causing a temporary impairment of function.B. Whoever commits aggravated battery, inflicting an injury to the person which is not likely to cause death or great bodily harm, but does cause painful temporary disfigurement or temporary loss or impairment of the functions of any member or organ of the body, is guilty of a misdemeanor.
If the larceny or fraud charges are felonies, the bitch is guilty of
30-3-2. Aggravated assault.
So here we have a wonderful laundry list of crimes...C. willfully and intentionally assaulting another with intent to commit any felony.
GALE Force Biological Agent/
BOTM/Great Dolphin Conspiracy/
Entomology and Evolutionary Biology Subdirector:SD.net Dept. of Biological Sciences
There is Grandeur in the View of Life; it fills me with a Deep Wonder, and Intense Cynicism.
Factio republicanum delenda est
BOTM/Great Dolphin Conspiracy/
Entomology and Evolutionary Biology Subdirector:SD.net Dept. of Biological Sciences
There is Grandeur in the View of Life; it fills me with a Deep Wonder, and Intense Cynicism.
Factio republicanum delenda est
- Simplicius
- Jedi Council Member
- Posts: 2031
- Joined: 2006-01-27 06:07pm
Re: NM nurse removing birth control without patients consent
There is a lawsuit in the works here:RedImperator wrote:So, like, is there anyone in this thread who actually knows anything about civil or criminal law commenting on the civil and/or criminal liabilities of the nurse in question? "Clear cut case of battery"--really? Okay, which New Mexico statute did she violate? "Class action lawsuit at the minimum"--where's the evidence a class-action case is possible? I don't doubt that there's a potential lawsuit here, and that laws were probably violated (certainly professional ethics were), but it would be nice if people could bring some evidence to the table when they play amateur lawyer.
Since this is a tort case, I believe the specific violation of a statue is not a necessary condition for the case to go through, though I am prepared to be mistaken.Courthouse News wrote:The patient sued Presbyterian Health Services Rio Rancho Family Health Center and nurse practitioner Sylvia Olona in Federal Court....The plaintiff demands damages for battery, constitutional violations and negligence.
As for battery, I think there is a clear basis for that claim. A little reading turns up that medical battery consists of unauthorized touching; specifically, an instance where a procedure was performed without the consent of the patient - distinct from informed consent cases, which are concerned with negligence. (American Medical Association). Medical battery can be argued when either a procedure was conducted though a patient didin't authorize it, or if it was conducted without the patient's knowledge. (Day on Torts).
According to the 530B. Medical Battery form (embedded), the plaintiff has to prove four conditions: That informed consent was given under a precondition, and that precondition was not met although the procedure was conducted; that the practitioner performed the procedure with knowledge that consent has not been given; that the plaintiff was harmed; and that the defendant's conduct was a substantial factor in causing that harm.
This is not a criminal matter as no charges have been filed. The civil claims made by the plaintiff have already been presented here.Alyrium Denryle wrote:So here we have a wonderful laundry list of crimes...