Law Ethics and Professional Code of Conduct - PDF

Law and ethics 1
LAW ETHICS AND PROFESSIONAL CODE OF CONDUCT.
Written by:
Course
Tutor
University
City and State
Date

Law and ethics 2
Introduction.
Law, ethics and professionalism play a key role in healthcare services provision. Medical
decisions are made with strict consideration these key elements. Legal issues are handled
according to the existing common laws and state laws (Avery, 2016). They are made through a
legislative process. Some acts may be amended, added or repealed to address the arising issues in
health care. according Chadwick & Gallagher (2016) ethical issues are the values that one is
expected to uphold in their respective profession. The respective regulatory body stipulates the
accepted codes of conduct of its registered members. This promotes professionalism in the
discharge of their respective duties. All these are set out to improve the quality of services
offered.
Legal issues.
The privacy act of 1988 regulates the collecting, use, handling of personal information in
Australia (Webb and Dayal, 2017). Personal information is identified as true or untrue
information or opinions of an identifiable person. The act outlines thirteen Australian Privacy
Principles (APP) involved in the handling of private information. The second principle is about
anonymity and pseudo anonymity (Mendelson and Wolf, 2017). It protects one from having the
information linked to them. in this case, the name is completely withheld or another name which
is not the true name of the individual is used in the case of pseudo anonymity. Sharni wrote a
message directly to Carla. The information on the loss was directly linked to her. Her privacy
was breached through this act. For any reason if her information was to be shared, and preferably
not to the public, she ought to be delinked since she has not allowed its disclosure.

Law and ethics 3
The sixth APP regulates the use and disclosure of personal information and sensitive information
(Summons and Regan, 2016). Carla’s health records fall under sensitive information. It should
have been held with utmost secrecy and can only be disclosed when she consents. There exist
some exceptions to this law. When an APP agency is expected to use the primarily collected
information for secondary purposes. The law may require the disclosure of such information for
instance in a court or tribunal proceeding. The law hold that such information should not be
published in the internet, either intentionally or non-intentionally, and be accessed by others. If
an individual does not comply with these laws, they are held liable for breaching and would be
penalized and convicted in accordance to the existing laws.
Carla’s privacy has been invaded without her consent. Any action taken by a healthcare provider
in the interest of the patient should receive a go ahead from the patient (O’Brien, et al, 2015).
Clearly in the case scenario, Carla has not had a discussion with Sharni. Sharni goes ahead and
writes a condolence message. She has not fully disclosed Carla’s information but has partially
made it clear to the public that she had had a loss and was sympathizing. This is sensitive
information and should not be disclosed unless there is a consent. She is prosecutable under the
privacy act 1988 in the sixth principle. Her actions, though may seem unintentional are
completely illegal. Sharni’s act is not an exception to this law, it is prosecutable.
Sharni accesses Carla’s and discovered that she had had an ectopic pregnancy that was removed.
She posts a condolence message on her Facebook wall. The information on the patients’ health
was collected and protected by the privacy act. Healthcare providers are allowed to access
patient information as the agency is anticipated to use the information for a secondary purpose;
treatment. The disclosure between health care providers involved in her case is allowed to ensure
completely holistic approach in treatment.

Law and ethics 4
All those who are directly involved in provision of care can be allowed to access and use it
appropriately. Sharni, on the other hand, was not attending to Carla. It was not her prerogative to
gain access to the health records. She has illegally accessed the information. Sharni is a third
party to whom the information was not shared. The security of Carla’s information has been
breached unlawfully. Sharni will answer charges of illegally assessing patient information if they
are aligned in a court. The hospital cold answer charges for not protecting personal information
from illegal access. The hospital is expected to take reasonable steps to prevent the access,
modification or loss of patient information (Williams et al, 2015). It is supposed to put in
measures to ensure that the information is only accessed by those directly linked to provide care.
Ethical issues.
Ethics refer to the morally acceptable way of practice. In the nursing profession, some ethical
principles have been developed over time and it dictates the way they respond to different
clinical situations (Alligood, 2017). Some have been revised, others reaffirmed and others
repealed. Some were adopted the Hippocratic oath while others have been adopted following
major events in history. For instance, the use of human subjects in research became an issue of
debate during the second world war and brought the principle of autonomy in decision making.
In the recent past, social media has gained a lot of popularity from all corners of the world. The
rights of a patient may be infringed in the process of adapting to the dynamics of technology.
This makes it necessary to reaffirm some of these principles to make them more relevant and
applicable to solve any dilemmas.
The united nations declaration of bioethics and human rights was held to promote human dignity
in bioethics and research. There are four principles of bioethics: autonomy, beneficence, non-
maleficence and justice (Johnstone, 2015). These principles are fundamental in health service

Law and ethics 5
provision and applies to all the professions, including nurses. The patient has a right to make
their own decision regarding a course of action in the course of treatment. They should not be
coerced or made to undergo any procedure without their consent. The have the right to
autonomy. This principle prevents them from taking an action that the patient has not consented
even though they think it would be the best one to take. Handling of patient information should
also be accorded the same level of autonomy. The patient should be allowed to decide on
publishing of their private information. The autonomy of Carla in deciding whether her personal
information should be shared was not granted. It was assessed and published without her
permission.
The principle of non-maleficence states that any medical intervention should not be perceived to
cause any harm to the patient (Chadwick and Gallagher, 2016). All the medical decisions made
should be in the best interest of the patient. Sharni is bound by the nursing ethics to only do that
which does not cause harm to the patient in the line of duty. Harm can be physical, emotional, or
psychological. Her actions can be perceived to cause ham to Carla when she discovers that her
private information had been published on an open platform. Her actions might be argued not to
be a complete exposure of her information, but the fact that she did talk to her in private and
express her sentiments shows some malicious intentions were underway. Even if this was not her
motive, the fact still remains that it had the propensity of resulting into psychological harm. Such
an action ought not to happen in the nursing profession.
The International Council of Nursing (ICN) has set out a code of ethics for the interaction
between the nurse and other parties in healthcare (Schmidt, MacWilliams and Neal-Boylan,
2017). There are four elements of the code of ethics which include: nurse and people, nurse and
practice, nurse and profession and nurse and co-workers. For a practicing nurse like Sharni, there

Law and ethics 6
are some expectations in their conduct in practice and in dealing with other people. She is
expected to use information management system that ensures confidentiality. Her actions belittle
the provisions of the code of ethics. Nurses are supposed to respect human rights and personal
beliefs. Sharni has violated Carla’s rights. She is entitled to privacy once she gives out her
personal and sensitive information under the Privacy act of 1988. Revocations of the right have
not been permitted in the case scenario therefore under no circumstance should this be denied.
Professional issues.
Professional conduct of individuals is regulated by the concerned professional body. The
Nursing and Midwifery Board of Australia regulates the conduct of nurses and nursing students.
It sets out the expectation in performing their duties. It registers nurses and registers them in
accordance to the set out codes of conduct.
Nurses are expected to practice in a safe and competent manner (Kangasniemi, Pakkanen and
Korhonen, 2015). This underscores the need to embrace competency in skills and ensuring that
the safety of the patient is upheld. Sharni disregarded this code of conduct. She indulged in a
practice that has the capability of causing psychological disturbance and discomfort to a patient.
Disregard to the confidentiality of a patient may have effects on their social life and esteem.
Nurses are expected to work in accordance with the set standard and those of the health system
in totality. According to Chadwick and Gallagher (2016) issue of confidentiality is always
emphasized in the broader health system. Health care involves the provision of services to the
people. Establishing and maintaining a rapport is of utmost essence. Trust and confidentiality
form the foundation upon which healthcare services are provided. A breach of the trust has an
overall net effect on the quality of services provided. The conduct of Sharni was in total breach

Law and ethics 7
of trust. Having had access to Carla’s file, she had a responsibility of maintain the confidence
Carla had when she visited the hospital. Gaining the patients’ trust is an important aspect of the
nurse patient relationship.
Nurses are expected to work in accordance to the relevant laws in discharging their professional
duty. The privacy laws of 1988 are among the laws that form the mainstay in the practice
(Keogh, et al, 2018). Nurses are expected to uphold them at all times. Failure to abide by them
attracts a penalty as per the law. It also surmounts to professional misconduct. Professionally
abiding by the laws catalyzes the process of discharging their duties. Sharni shows sheer
disregard to the act which is a very important and relevant element of her practice. This is a
professional misconduct.
Nurses are expected to treat personal information that is acquired professionally as confidential.
The privileges of the relationship between a patient and a nurse should include confidentiality.
By the virtue of being a nurse one is bound to safeguard patients’ information at all times. The
information gained should be restricted to professional use (Birks, Davis, Smithson and Cant,
2016). To provide competent care to the patient, confidentiality is essential. In circumstances
where such information is to be disclosed, then the individual in question should consent to such
a move. Sharni did not uphold this professional mandate. She disclosed the information that is
personal to the public. The information obtained was also not intended for the provision of care.
she only pasted it on Facebook which clearly shows it was not used for its rightful purpose. Also
she did not seek Carla’s consent before disclosing the personal information.
The Australian Health Practitioners Regulation agency and the national boards for the respective
professions regulate the conduct of health practitioners. The AHPRA social media act of 2014
regulates the conduct of healthcare providers when using social media platforms. According to

Law and ethics 8
Panahi et al (2016) the act emphasizes on the responsibility and adherence to the confidentiality
and privacy obligations. The act was developed to handle the increased use of social media
which may result in the sharing of confidential information. Prohibiting the sharing of patient
information to ensure that the patients privacy is upheld. Posting information directly to the
person or sharing with another third party is considered a professional misconduct. Sharni
indulged in the violation of this act and thereby exposing Carla’s personal information.
Conclusion.
Laws, ethics and professional codes of conduct ensures a smooth running activities in the health
sector. They provide solutions to some dilemmas that require a blend of all of them to solve. The
conduct of nurses should be above some standards to ensure quality and upholding of the
patients right and dignity. Taking into account the gravity of their responsibility, they have an
obligation to practice as per the standards. The law imposes penalties on those who violate its
provisions. Ethics and professional codes of conduct are enforced by regulatory bodies.

Law and ethics 9
References
Alligood, M. R. (2017). Nursing Theorists and Their Work-E-Book. Elsevier Health Sciences.
Avery, G. 2016. Law and Ethics in Nursing and Healthcare: An Introduction. SAGE.
Birks, M., Davis, J., Smithson, J. and Cant, R., 2016. Registered nurse scope of practice in
Australia: an integrative review of the literature. Contemporary nurse, 52(5), pp.522-543.
Chadwick, R. and Gallagher, A., 2016. Ethics and nursing practice. Palgrave Macmillan.
Chadwick, R. and Gallagher, A., 2016. Ethics and nursing practice. Palgrave Macmillan.
Chadwick, R., & Gallagher, A. 2016. Ethics and nursing practice. Palgrave Macmillan.
Johnstone, M.J., 2015. Bioethics: a nursing perspective. Elsevier Health Sciences.
Kangasniemi, M., Pakkanen, P. and Korhonen, A., 2015. Professional ethics in nursing: an
integrative review. Journal of advanced nursing, 71(8), pp.1744-1757.
Keogh, K., Gordon, C. and Marinovic, P., 2018. Cyber security: Global developments in cyber
security law: is Australia keeping pace?. LSJ: Law Society of NSW Journal, (42), p.82.
Mendelson, D. and Wolf, G., 2017. Health Privacy and Confidentiality.
O’Brien, K., Bracht, M., Robson, K., Xiang, Y.Y., Mirea, L., Cruz, M., Ng, E., Monterrosa, L.,
Soraisham, A., Alvaro, R. and Narvey, M., 2015. Evaluation of the Family Integrated Care
model of neonatal intensive care: a cluster randomized controlled trial in Canada and
Australia. BMC pediatrics, 15(1), p.210.
Panahi, S., Watson, J. and Partridge, H., 2016. Social media and physicians: exploring the
benefits and challenges. Health informatics journal, 22(2), pp.99-112.

Law and ethics 10
Schmidt, B.J., MacWilliams, B.R. and Neal-Boylan, L., 2017. Becoming Inclusive: A Code of
Conduct for Inclusion and Diversity. Journal of Professional Nursing, 33(2), pp.102-107.
Summons, P. and Regan, B., 2016. Social impact of big data in australian healthcare. Les
Cahiers du numérique, 12(1), pp.13-30.
Webb, T. and Dayal, S., 2017. Building the wall: Addressing cybersecurity risks in medical
devices in the USA and Australia. Computer Law & Security Review, 33(4), pp.559-563.
Williams, H., Spencer, K., Sanders, C., Lund, D., Whitley, E.A., Kaye, J. and Dixon, W.G.,
2015. Dynamic consent: a possible solution to improve patient confidence and trust in how
electronic patient records are used in medical research. JMIR medical informatics, 3(1).