Nurse turns off life support 'by mistake'

[Freefaller]

Too many people are ready to blame the person/people rather than understand the true root cause of the issue. I'd suggest that the problem/issue was the process which allowed an unqualified nurse to work in such an environment, or the training method isn't suitable. There has to be a process for every step in everything we do in life - a process is just a set of actions necessary to achieve the outcome desired. If those processes aren't review or controlled, you will get these problems.

Having said that, had I not been correctly trained, I would not have touched any of the buttons on equipment I didn't understand. Furthermore, in this instance the management team should have ensured they had the right person for the right job - in this case, either the training or recruitment or assignment process had broken down which led to an unsuitable person being able to do something like this.

Eitherway it's tragic, and I'm not trying to absolve the nurse or management of any culpability - what is done is done, however I'd want to ensure that the processes are reviewed, and any flaws in the processes have controls in place to ensure that this mistake doesn't happen again.

 

[Redz]

Thee was a case a while back when someone died because a cleaner unplugged his life support so they could plug a vacuum cleaner in.

Urban myth that one, I'm afraid.

http://www.snopes.com/horrors/freakish/cleaner.asp

Having said that, had I not been correctly trained, I would not have touched any of the buttons on equipment I didn't understand.

My sentiments exactly, I was going to post along similar lines. She didn't accidentally switch off the life support machine as in unlpugged it by mistakes or pressed a wrong button etc. She knowingly turned it off and said so to the carer when asked what she had done. Why on Earth did she switch it off? What was the reasoning, if any, behind her decision?

 

[The Badger]

That is awful.

 

[dienamite]

Why didn't she just turn the machine back on? And if she didn't know how because the machine is really complicated, why isn't there a big green ON switch? Surely these machines can remember the settings for the last patient?

Apologies if this is a stupid question.

 

[Naffa]

I felt sick after reading the article... Absolutely awful.

How one earth she ended up working with anything she didn't have a clue how to use, let alone something that was so integral to somebody's survival... If she didn't know what she was doing, she should not have been messing about with a life support machine, did she have no idea what could have been doing? Did she have no idea what the consequences could be, of fiddling about with a life support machine when you don't know how to use it?

 

[MickeyFinns]

Why didn't she just turn the machine back on? And if she didn't know how because the machine is really complicated, why isn't there a big green ON switch? Surely these machines can remember the settings for the last patient?

Apologies if this is a stupid question.

I think she didn't realise she'd turned it off.

 

[JBuk]

How awful, and the fact he had already raised concerns about such issues which led to the installment of the camera shows massive failings all round. Hopefully some of the people involved will face crminal charges.

 

[cm1179]

awful stuff, poor sod

 

[wordy]

or Rotheram or any of the other ****holes of the world?

Like Coventry?

 

[Vonhelmet]

Urban myth that one, I'm afraid.

http://www.snopes.com/horrors/freakish/cleaner.asp

Was it? Huh, I was sure I read it in the paper. So much for my memory.

 

[Xordium]

This. I don't know how many people are aware, but nurses are not allowed to administer first aid either, not without having first aid training which anyone can do. First aid training is not part of nurse training.

These sorts of things happen all the time, maybe not with life support machines. A nursing home I know of a nurse gave penicillin to a patient who is/was allergic to it and also gave antibiotics to an asthma patient without giving them steroids, and this happened in the same week.

Your point about first aid is wrong. Nurses can administer first aid within their knowledge and limitations. There is no designated skills labelled as first aid given during training because "first aid" is a combination of skills that should have been covered in their training. Likewise nurses or doctors do not get a training to deal with someone whom has had a car crash but they do learn airway management skills that they should be able to apply to that situation within their own limitations and experience.

If the nurse gave penicillin then the medical practitioner was culpable as they were the ones that actually prescribed the drug. The nurse should naturally have queried it and therefore also is in breech. Moreover, you can give someone an antibiotic if they are allergic as long as they are covered with other medications eg piriton.

As for the OP. That particular nurse would be in breech of their professional code as they have attempted to do something they did not understand. It was their responsibility to highlight that they were not skilled to look after that patient. The nurse should have had a BLS certifiication so they should have been able to commence some sort of resus attempt. However, most of these certifications do not often include the use of bag-valve-mask. Therefore again the nurse should have acknowledged their limitations in regards to the use of that equipment. Hard to see really how they are not going to get struck off the register.

 

[Vonhelmet]

I disagree though. People (with normally some political or moral axe to grind) place a value on someone elses life. But its not hard to value this most precious comodity when its not yours

We all pay for it, though, because this was an NHS patient. At some point you have to question whether it is worth saving a life, or keeping someone alive. At some point it just isn't economically viable. How many people can we really afford to keep on life support? How many quadraplegics with no quality of life?

And the very fact that it is not my life puts me in a better position to judge this. A person has a vested interest in keeping themselves alive, no matter the cost, because... it's their life, obviously. That doesn't make their choice any more economically sensible, though.

I am sure the only person who can genuinely place a value on life is someone placing the value on their own life.

Their valuation will be vastly at odds with what the NHS can reasonably afford, though.

Ask yourself the question how much would I accept to terminate my own life I bet its a hell of a lot more than your relatives would get if something happened to you from say neglect from some company.

Personally there is no amount of money I would accept to take my own life, so my life is priceless to me.
I may possibly accept a £100M now in exchange for giving them my life in 20 years time. Possibly, not certainly, I would need to think about it more.

It's absurd to ask what you would accept to terminate your own life, but you know that as you added the smiley. The question is more "At what point do we just have to accept that someone is as good as dead and move on."

Cases like this are an argument for private medical insurance of some kind. Sure, keep people on life support with a negligible quality of life, but don't do it at the taxpayers' expense.

People with quadraplegic family members - flame on.

 

[Thesaff]

The Nurse in question is under investigation by the relevant nursing body. This is a tragedy and more than that.
The company which supplied that nurse should be held responsible, as they supplied a Nurse without the correct training to do a task which clearly stated to them. What bothers me even more, is the fact that the patient installed a camera because of his fear of substandard care. A fear which was unfortunately for him proven to be true. Why did the company supply a Nurse without the relevant training.

 

[Tefal]

Thats the whole point about being a director, you are taking on the responsibility for running the company properly and in some industries that comes with he expectation you will hire staff that can competently do the job. If you can't do or don't want to do that your not director material.

So you think the Directors of HSBC should personally have to confirm the qualifications of the 300,000 people they employ?


Not much time to be a director in that case.

 

[ColdAsIce]

Keeping people alive that are in a vegetative state or those that have lost both arms and legs is unfortunately a complete waste of time and resources. This is only done so that the family have something to hold onto, the actual patient themselves has zero quality of life.

Not sure how that Nurse will ever be able to live with herself after those actions, I was completely horrified viewing that video.

As always in the UK, a "review" will be undertaken and nothing will change

 

[rypt]

Cases like this are an argument for private medical insurance of some kind. Sure, keep people on life support with a negligible quality of life, but don't do it at the taxpayers' expense.

Sow hat if we end someone's life today, and tomorrow we develop a fix using stem cells?

 

[wordy]

Keeping people alive that are in a vegetative state or those that have lost both arms and legs is unfortunately a complete waste of time and resources. This is only done so that the family have something to hold onto, the actual patient themselves has zero quality of life.

Not sure how that Nurse will ever be able to live with herself after those actions, I was completely horrified viewing that video.

As always in the UK, a "review" will be undertaken and nothing will change

I dunno, some new targets might get introduced.

 

[Vonhelmet]

Sow hat if we end someone's life today, and tomorrow we develop a fix using stem cells?

Then that's very sad.

But in the meantime, we can't keep everyone alive for ever just in case we learn how to fix terminal brain damage or whatever. We just don't have the money or the time or the manpower.

 

[Dave M]

We all pay for it, though, because this was an NHS patient. At some point you have to question whether it is worth saving a life, or keeping someone alive. At some point it just isn't economically viable. How many people can we really afford to keep on life support? How many quadraplegics with no quality of life?

And the very fact that it is not my life puts me in a better position to judge this. A person has a vested interest in keeping themselves alive, no matter the cost, because... it's their life, obviously. That doesn't make their choice any more economically sensible, though.

To be perfectly honest it isn't economically viable to put a plaster on some of the benefit sponging chavs in our society - they have no economic output so any medical intervention is economically unviable.

What price would your perfect society put on your life?

 

[Stretch]

So you think the Directors of HSBC should personally have to confirm the qualifications of the 300,000 people they employ?


Not much time to be a director in that case.

Not personally no, but they employ people to make sure it's done correctly.

They are ultimately responsible for making sure the business take the necessary step to fulfill its obligations.