Self-activity: Scenario 1: Yes the patient can actually sue the nurse aide because what she committed

was a negligent act which clearly resulted in an injury. Doctrine of Personal Liability. The nurse aide is responsible for the damages the patient has acquired because it is from his/her own negligent actions that caused direct injury. Thus giving way for Civil Liability to be imposed against the nurse aide. This liability imposes a penalty of damages in the form of payment or compensation. This liability is the basis of the damage suffered by the aggravated party, on the account of the supposed negligence of the nurse. The institution on the other hand may or may not be sued, it does not assume the Doctrine of Respondeat Superior because the institution is not totally responsible for the injury. Scenario 2: Malpractice can be considered because the nurse failed to meet the reasonably expected standard of care required of him. Although there was no evidence of harm to the patient, but negligence may also be considered. Simply because in negligence, four elements must be considered:

First is duty of care- there is duty of care because clearly there is a nurse patient relationship because the nurse himself is giving patient nursing care through catheterization. Second is breach of duty- the nurse also committed a breach of duty because he has violated hospital policy regarding the use of sterile technique whenever catheterization care is to be done. Third is Injury- in the case above there has been no ill effects from the use of unsterile catheter to the patient, thus there will be no grounds for lawsuit to be filed against the nurse. Fourth is Causation of Proximate Cause- there is no direct cause and effect relationship between the breach in the standard and harm to the patient. Thus, Negligence nor Malpractice is not applicable FOR THE MEANTIME when no ill effects has occurred yet. If injury has actually been manifested by the patient, then the Doctrine of Res Ipsa Loquitor may be applied, because the mistake in itself, by the nurse, is very obvious. But since the

injury has not caused ill effects to the patient YET, then the doctrine of foreseeability. Administrative liability may be imposed against the nurse IF, and only IF there has been ill effects of the wrong act of the nurse that has been manifested by the patient. Administrative liability is that which is occurred for a violation of any administrative or regulatory law in the Philippines. (Nursing Act or Medtech Act, all else follows) These laws regulates or governs practice of nursing in the Philippines. It provides grounds of reasons for reprimand, suspension or revocation of a license to practice nursing in the Philippines.

Scenario 3: The situation clearly states that the doctors orders were clearly explained by the nurse to the patient that she should avoid weight bearing activities particularly on the right leg because she has undergone right hip pinning. After the nurse relayed the instructions to the patient, the patient repeated the instructions to assure that she has understood the instructions well. The patient actually has no grounds to file a lawsuit against the nurse because she neglected the doctors order. Yes, negligence may have occurred but the patient herself contributed to her own injury thus giving way to the Doctrine of Contributory Negligence or Doctrine of Common Fault.