NEW ZEALAND HEALTH/LAW

NEW ZEALAND HEALTH/LAW

 

 2000WORDS.

 500 EACH LEARNING OUTCOME LO1-LO4

 

Andrew and Melissa were both surgical nurses working in the same District Health Board. They never had a good working relationship despite mediation from their employer.

 

After an incident during a surgery, Andrew posted a photo of Melissa to an online NZ Nurses’ Forum with the following caption, “This nurse Melissa Rebcan should be fired and never allowed to work again! Gave wrong medication in surgery today and nearly killed the patient! Pretty sure she was drunk at the time. Let her know what you think about drunk nurses on the job at melissa.rebcan@1234.net”.

 

Melissa received six abusive and threatening messages and was extremely upset. She had sleepless nights, had two weeks off work, and developed depression.

 

She emailed the Nurses’ Forum site several times to ask that Andrew’s message be removed, but the site did not respond.  The message remained on the site.

Instructions:

Do not include an introduction or conclusion. Use the headings LO1, LO2, LO3 and LO4. LO5 relates to the academic standard and applies across your full assessment. APA 7^TH REFERENCING AND IN-TEXT.

Analyse the legal implications for Andrew and the Nurses’ Forum through the learning outcomes.

( This is the marking criteria written below)

All learning outcomes for assessment #2 relate to the Harmful Digital Communications Act.READ: Gudmanz, T. (2019) Harmful digital communications. LawTalk927

• I have attached some slides I created to help ^^

THESE ARE TOPICS TO LOOK INTO TO HELP. Remember all of these are related to New Zealand laws (civil and criminal). Use only these to answer the learning outcomes. Unless otherwise specified. NO OTHER COUNTRY LAW

• DUTY OF CARE AND ACC
• Human Rights review tribunal
• Privacy
• Health Practitioners Competence Assurance Act (HPCAA)
• Disability Law
• Harmful Digital Communications
• Criminal Law (remember the difference between this and civil law)
• Civil Law
• Public Health Law
• Issues at the End of Life
• End of Life Choice Act

YOUR RIGHTS

• Crimes Act 1961
• NZ Bill of Rights Act 1990
• Human Rights Act 1993: Age and disability discrimination
• Privacy Act 1993: Health Information Privacy Principles
• Health and Disability Commissioner Act 1994: Code of Health and Disability Consumer Rights 1996
• Health Practitioners Competence Assurance Act 2003: Health Practitioners Disciplinary Tribunal

Please make sure LO3 AND LO4 are more focused on. Not just made up if you don’t understand… these are the two important ones I need to pass. – As I have passed the other learning outcomes already.However this does not mean to neglect the rest. All need to pass. But will fail if I don’t get those two..

 

LO1:Demonstrate understanding of legal institutions and processes in health care(500 words). Discuss the institutions and processes involved in the Harmful Digital Communications Act. Discuss the communication principles that may be relevant in this scenario. Discuss how Melissa’s complaints could progress and the potential legal outcomes.

LO1 MARKING CRITERIA – Understanding ofrelevant legal institutions and processes in health care are clearly demonstrated

LO2:Analyse the role of civil and criminal law on health care policy and practice(500 words).Demonstrate knowledge of the distinction between civil and criminal law (burden of proof and standard of proof). Examine whether there are any potential criminal law implications in this case. Be specific and cite relevant sections of the Harmful Digital Communications Act, if relevant.

LO2 MARKING CRITERIA – Clear, accurate analysis of role of civil and criminal law on health care and practice is demonstrated

 

LO3:Critique cases or legislation related to consumers’ rights based on scholarly research(500 words). Discuss how the law could be improved, citing research. Focus on law that is relevant in this case.

• So I think that would be the consumers rights and mainly the Harmful Digital Communication Act
• Some reading that may helphttps://www.hdc.org.nz/media/2679/03hdc00153casenote.pdf
• Reading for Harmful Digital Communication Act to relate your research too.
  https://www.lawsociety.org.nz/news/lawtalk/issue-927/harmful-digital-communications/
  – I attached another file for a reading if you needed
• http://www.nzlii.org/nz/journals/AukULRev/2015/11.pdf

 

LO3 MARKING CRITERIA – Sound critique of cases or legislation relating to consumers’ rights with some reference to scholarly research is demonstrated

 

LO4:Examine the implications of case law and legislation for your current or future health care practice(500 words).

State what your occupation is (standard pathway students choose a relevant health or disability occupation). State whether that is a registered or unregistered occupation.

Identify a possible issue in your future practice. Apply the lessons learned from the LO1 breaches to this issue in practice. Use case examples where relevant

 

LO4 MARKING CRITERIA – Moderate depth of examination of the implications of case law and legislation for current or future health care practice is demonstrated. Moderate integration of relevant research

I have written this =

With LO4 – The occupation is paramedic or student that is. It is unregistered at the moment but 2021 it may be brought in for registration. It definitely could be a problem in the future. Esepcially for people who may lose the license to practice now as it won’t be valid.

• The Human Rights Review Tribunal Covers both unregistered and registered practitioners. This is in the one of the slides I provided
• HPCAA/HPDT covers all registered health practitioners and many more may join.

 

LO5:Present work at the appropriate academic standard (applies across assessment).PROPER APA 7^TH REFERENCING !! and don’t forget proper in-text apa 7^th referencing

 

 

THESE ARE TOPICS TO LOOK INTO TO HELP. Remember all of these are related to New Zealand laws (civil and criminal). Use only these to answer the learning outcomes. Unless otherwise specified.

• DUTY OF CARE AND ACC
• Human Rights review tribunal
• Privacy
• Health Practitioners Competence Assurance Act (HPCAA)
• Disability Law
• Harmful Digital Communications
• Criminal Law
• Public Health Law
• Issues at the End of Life
• End of Life Choice Act

YOUR RIGHTS

• Crimes Act 1961
• NZ Bill of Rights Act 1990
• Human Rights Act 1993: Age and disability discrimination
• Privacy Act 1993: Health Information Privacy Principles
• Health and Disability Commissioner Act 1994: Code of Health and Disability Consumer Rights 1996
• Health Practitioners Competence Assurance Act 2003: Health Practitioners Disciplinary Tribunal

 

 

Some common questions

L/O 3

Q: Where can I find some examples of critique for this LO?

Please refer to the readings for the topic for examples. We also discussed some issues with the HDCA in the webinar.

I supplied some reading material for this.

L/O 4

Q: I can’t find a case that relates to my profession. What do I do? 

LO4 asks you to think of something that might happen around HDC in your future practice. What’s an example of something you might do that breaches the HDCA similar to LO1? Apply the lessons from LO1. What might happen to you? What might the implications be?

You are correct that there are far fewer cases on this Act. Where you do find a case, it may not involve a person in your profession, but the same lessons may apply.

 

 

Could improve (based on OVERALL STUDENTS 1^ST ASSIGNMETN). Thought this might help.

Proofreading for accuracy: titles of legislation, names of the relevant legal institutions, spelling, authors’ names, reference list. Grammar. Appropriate use of lower and upper case letters.

 

Accurate attribution of sources: citation.

 

Analysis of the law relevant to the scenario in all 4 LOs.

 

Citation to credible sources and application of that content.

 

Accurate referencing to publications, rather than attempts at paraphrasing powerpoints.

 

Use of resources. Rather than listing a string of authors, use select authors to make the argument. Demonstrate that the articles were read. Explain why this author was selected.

 

LO1

Better explanation of how the relevant institutions and law applies to the scenario.

Clearer understanding of the processes and potential legal outcomes, in detail.

 

Lo2

Explanation of how the criminal law could apply. Needed to identify specific section(s) of Crimes Act and how they relate to conduct.

 

Needed to read Crimes Act sections, rather than titles of sections only.

 

LO3

State in sentence one what the specific critique is. Precisely explain how the law could be improved.

 

Avoid restating the case. Instead, expand discussion of how the law could be better, based on the scenario.

 

Focus on improvements to the law, not the person’s conduct.

Clearly discuss how the cited research applies to critique of the law in the scenario.

 

LO4
Discussed registration for their occupation, rather than the assigned topic.

Made broad generalisations (e.g. “I have learned I need to follow the Code of Rights”) but did not cite the detail of the relevant law (e.g. the specific rights from LO1 and how they are relevant in practice).