2 Q of BS - dna23

[ArchivalUser]

1.yes (hes liable coz he should have supported the neck with a collar or atleast stabilized it, the resultant quadreplegia is due to this)

2. No.. (nothing can be done to save the child)

[ArchivalUser]

1. no, the resident is protected by law , but he has to be1. licensed (in practice 2. not getting paid for helping this person 3. this happened not during his working hours.
so the person family cant sue the physician nor his hospital.
2. i think yes because this is considered neglect.

[ArchivalUser]

1) NO
2) Yes

[ArchivalUser]

1. No the resident is protected under Good Sameritan law
2. Yes necause this is considered neglect

[ArchivalUser]

so whats the answer?!!

[ArchivalUser]

in this kind of answer...my stategi...put same answer in both...atleast one will be correct..

[ArchivalUser]

1.Yes physician is liable,,,You are off the duty and patient is critical doesn't mean, you leave that patient handicapped by playing around with his neck...That's the basic ABCD.. every physician should know how to stabilise a trauma victim...They are not saying whether physician goes to jail or not...That's the second issue...But HE IS LIABLE..

2. Every attending physical has full right to withdraw unnecessary and futile resucitative efforts...very little premature baby..Physician decided not to resuscitate...is good a decision...Not all patient's life can be saved by CPR...you may have to withdraw..futile..procedures...That's perfectly ok..

[ArchivalUser]

1 is Yes, because the physician did not protect the neck of the patient resulting in quadriplegia.
2 is No, Please remember, no physician in the USA has ever been found liable for withholding or withdrawing any life sustaining treatment from any patient for any reason.

[ArchivalUser]

1-no
2 yes