L21 Ethics

Duty of care is our duty to exercise reasonable care and skill i.e. at a standard expected of a [blank_start]reasonably[blank_end] competent practitioner skilled in that field; not perfection. This relates to the Code of Ethics, right 4. Right 4 is the right to services of an [blank_start]appropriate standard[blank_end]: "Every consumer has the right to: (1) services provided with reasonable [blank_start]care and skill[blank_end]; (2) services provided that comply with [blank_start]legal, professional,ethical[blank_end] & other relevant standards; 3) services provided in a manner [blank_start]consistent[blank_end] with his or her [blank_start]needs[blank_end]; (4) services provided in a manner that minimizes the potential [blank_start]harm[blank_end] to, and ‘optimizes the quality of [blank_start]life[blank_end]’ of, that consumer; (5) [blank_start]co-operation[blank_end] among providers to ensure quality and continuity of services."

A provider is not in breach of [the Code of Ethics] if they have taken reasonable actions in the circumstances to give effect to the rights, and comply with the duties, in the Code.

When a patient believes their HC provider's actions are a breach of their ethical rights, a complaint can be made to the [blank_start]Health and Disability committee[blank_end]. The HDC complaints enter a triage system. There is a 'preliminary’ assessment: either “No [blank_start]Further[blank_end] Action” or... 1. A referral to another agency: Compensation: [blank_start]ACC[blank_end]; Competence: [blank_start]Professional Council[blank_end] (Nursing, Medical, Pharmacy Council etc)) 2. Refer to: [blank_start]provider, advocacy or mediation[blank_end] An [blank_start]investigation[blank_end] is then carried out by the referred party. If a breach of the code is found: 1. Recommendation (eg [blank_start]apology[blank_end]), [blank_start]Report[blank_end] to Prof Council (Nursing, Medical, Pharmacy Council etc 2. Or, rarely, refer to Director of [blank_start]Proceedings[blank_end] (rare) which may lay charges in: [blank_start]Health Practitioners Disciplinary[blank_end] Tribunal, [blank_start]Human Rights[blank_end] Review Tribunal, or take no further action.

(This is very unlikely to be assessed but I think it's [blank_start]cool[blank_end] so I put it in the quiz.) BISMARKS “ELEMENTS” OF A “GENUINE” APOLOGY: (1) recognition of the event that caused harm, (I recognise that ____ caused harm...) (2) an expression of regret and sympathy (I would like to express how much I regret my actions, and how sorry I am for _____...), (3) an acknowledgement of responsibility—where appropriate—once the facts are fully understood (I acknowledge that it was my responsibility...), (4) effective reparation, (usually ACC), and (5) one or more opportunities to meet again after a period of reflection. (If you should want to speak to me about this in the future I encourage you to do so...)