Andrea is admitted to the hospital with headache. One of the many tests she is subjected to included spinal tap. Unfortunately, the resident contaminates the first speckmen of spinal fluid. Andrea, is therefore subjected to a second spinal tap. She is upset and crying. Examination of the second spinal tap reveals that it is normal in all respect. Andrea is released and is advised to get some rest and take some headache pills. She resumes her normal life with no lasting problems. She, however, couldn’t get over the fact that she was subjected to two spinal taps and decides to sue the hospital. A. Who will the defendants in this suit be? R What is the likelihood that Andrea will prevail in her
A) The defendants in this suit will ultimately be the hospital. Although a resident or a worker at the hospital does the mistake, hospital will be held liable to any kind of damages. In this case, since the resident has contaminated the first specimen, plaintiff (Andrea) had to go through the second spinal tap. This was clearly a mistake from the resident’s end, who is ultimately working for the Hospital. So, hospital will be held liable and not the individual. So, the defendant in this suit will be the organization in the court of law.
B) It is always hard for the logic to prevail over the emotion. Although the logic here is that Andrea went though a second spinal tap which took place after the first got contaminated and her reports were very normal following the test reports, and secondly it might not have costed her a buck extra for the second report. But the emotion, pain and mental stress she carried with her throughout the entire process of the spinal tap for the second time made her distressful.
This clearly was a mistake on behalf of the resident. Their negligence in not keeping the sample safe made Andrea go through the entire process for the second time. So, in my opinion Andrea will win over her defendant in the court of law, since her emotion and distressful state will be considered and preferred over the logic.
3) To opposite the result, the outcome of the litigation should favor the hospital. If the hospital authorities claim that if the sample taken is insufficient for the spinal tap test hence they had to take the fluid for the second time, or if they say that the fluid content is bit low, so they had to wait and re-do again, then the court may consider their reasoning, and shall give an opposite verdict which is favorable to the hospital.
The reasons favoring the hospital and against the Andrea’s health might have changed the outcome of the litigation which thus changes the verdict and opposites the previous result.