|
|
Malcolm, H. (2004). Patient privacy in a shared hospital room: Right or luxury? Nursing Praxis in New Zealand, 20(1), 28–35.
Abstract: In this article the author discusses the New Zealand legislation aimed at protecting the individual's right to privacy and concludes that practice may place healthcare consumers' rights at risk. While patient privacy should be of concern to all health professionals, the focus here is on the nurse's role in relation to recently formulated competencies published by the Nursing Council of New Zealand, which includes the recommendation that care be seen to exhibit an awareness of healthcare consumers' rights to privacy alongside the expectation that nurses question practices that compromise patient privacy.
|
|
|
|
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.
|
|
|
|
Farrow, T., McKenna, B., & O'Brien, A. J. (2002). Initiating committal proceedings 'just in case' with voluntary patients: A critique of nursing practice. Nursing Praxis in New Zealand, 18(2), 15–23.
Abstract: The authors report a clinical audit that, combined with anecdotal evidence, verifies the practice of putting section 8B medical certificates on the files of voluntary mental health patients at the time of admission. This is seen as a strategy to balance the requirement to support and promote the autonomy of voluntary patients with the need to protect those patients or other people. A conceptual analysis of these issues indicates that such a practice is both legally questionable and ethically inappropriate. The authors suggest an alternative framework for practice that is legally and ethically preferable for both nurses and patients.
|
|
