b. Deviation From the Standard. Once the scope of duty or the standard of
care has been established, it must be shown that there was breach of duty, a deviation
from the standard, or failure to do something that should have been done. The test of
breach of duty relies on the reasonable person doctrine, which states that you have
committed breach of duty when you have failed to do what a reasonably prudent
professional would have done in the same or a similar situation. If, for example, you do
an excretory urogram (XU), it is not your fault if the patient has an allergic reaction. But,
you are at fault if you fail to have the emergency cart, with medications for allergic
reactions, handy and in readiness.
In Synoff v. Midway Hospital (Minn., 1970), the patient was burned because the x-ray
technologist (radiographer) improperly aligned the machine for which he was
responsible. The guide light came in contact with the anesthetized patient's skin,
causing a burn. The radiologist, who was present, was not liable because alignment of
the machine is within the scope of the radiographer's work and does not require a
physician's supervision. As a result, the hospital was found liable for the radiographer's
misalignment of the machine.
BREACH OF DUTY OF A REASONABLY PRUDENT PERSON
In Albrition v. Bossler City Hospital Commission (Calif., 1972), a patient, hospitalized for
abdominal pain from a ruptured appendix was brought to the x-ray table on a stretcher.
The radiographer did not notice that the x-ray requisition form did not include the
required brief history or that the patient was heavily sedated. He raised the label to the
vertical position without placing straps or supports on the patient, causing the patient to
break an ankle. The hospital was held liable because an x-ray technologist has a duty
to strap the sedated patient.
4-8.
INJURY, THE THIRD ELEMENT OF LIABILITY FOR ACTIONABLE
NEGLIGENCE
a. Actual Loss or Damage. Injury is the third element of actionable negligence
that must be proven. The claimant must have suffered some kind of actual loss or
damage. Injury may be physical, financial, emotional, or some other invasion of the
plaintiff's rights and privileges, such as invasion of privacy. The defendant may be
negligent and still not incur liability if no injury results to the plaintiff.
b. Emotional Injury. Good lawyers will try to convince juries of emotional
trauma, although it is hard to measure. Most courts will not allow suits based solely on
negligently inflicted emotional injuries. Usually, negligently inflicted emotional injuries
are compensated only when they accompany physical injuries. Intentional infliction of
emotional injury is compensated without proof of physical injury.
MD0066
4-7