|
|
Drake, M., & Stokes, G. (2004). Managing pre-registration student risk: A professional and legislative minefield. Nursing Praxis in New Zealand, 20(1), 15–27.
Abstract: This article reports data from 15 schools of nursing, surveyed to identify difficulties experienced by nurse educators with respect to entry, progression and programme completion of undergraduate nursing students. Risk assessment, along with a lack of clear policy and procedures were found to be the main problem areas. Difficulties were exacerbated for educators when there were challenges to their professional judgement, either from the Nursing Council of New Zealand or from within their own institution. The authors argue for more recognition of the dual role of nurse educators, and greater clarification of the Nursing Council of New Zealand role in regulating the student's programme entry and progression, and ultimate admission to the Register. It is suggested that the recently passed Health Practitioners Competence Assurance Act (2003) provides nursing with an opportunity to address some of these issues.
|
|
|
|
Carryer, J. B., & Boyd, M. (2003). The myth of medical liability for nursing practice. Nursing Praxis in New Zealand, 19(4-12), 4–12.
Abstract: This article explores the complex nature of liability in the case of standing orders and vicarious liability by employers, and also when nurses and doctors are in management roles. The authors address misconceptions about medico-legal responsibility for nursing practice with the advent of nurse prescribers and nurse practitioners. They refer to the submission made by the College of Nurses Aotearoa (NZ) on the Health Practitioners Competence Assurance Act (2003), and discuss practice liability and nurse-physician collaboration.
|
|
|
|
Carr, J. (2000). Ensuring consent is informed. Kai Tiaki: Nursing New Zealand, 6(7), 22–23.
Abstract: The author examines the concept of informed consent as it applies to patients and as it is obtained by nurses. The principles of autonomy, beneficence and non-maleficence are discussed. How these principles inform critical care nursing is explored and five inappropriate uses of technology in resuscitation are used as examples.
|
|
