I was prematurely given an iv even though the hospital knew they did not have all of the materials needed to operate on me. The hospital then canceled the case after I was given an IV. No medication was administered through the iv but due to the risk of air, infection, etc is this still worth a malpractice case?
Christopher G
If you suffered no injury, you won't find a lawyer to take the case. No injury = no damages = no payday for the lawyer.
Its not love, but its not bad
no you cant because one of the criteria for sueing is that there has to have been harm commited. i know this cause im in a nursing program and we've gone over this in class. what harm was there? potential harm is not harm
NurseBSN
Absolutely not. Any responsible lawyer you contacted would most likely attempt to stifle his or her laughter and send you on your way. Malpractice is a breach of duty. Whoever inserted your IV was doing so because it was within his or her scope of practice and was part of your treatment plan. IV insertion is not as traumatic and dangerous as you think; the risk of "air" or infection is extremely low, especially since no medication was administered through the IV and you need MUCH more "air" than you think to even cause trouble. You survived this without trauma or infection so just let it be.
zeldaslexicon
No
unschoolymomma
I doubt it. If there was no clear damage then you won't win.
djflare99
I walked into a hospital the other day, and it was really warm inside. I think I should sue the hospital for potential to cause heat stroke. What do you think?
Orignal From: Tips: Can I sue if hospital administered I.V but canceled surgery after knowing they didn't have everything needed?
Post a Comment