Healthcare Policy Analysis: Legal and Professional Issues in Nursing

This report analyzes the New York Reproductive Health Act (RHA) of 2019, examining its legal and professional implications within the context of nursing practice, specifically focusing on the role of the Advanced Practice Nurse (APN). The report summarizes the RHA, which expanded abortion rights and allowed healthcare practitioners, including APNs, to perform abortions within their scope of practice. It then discusses the strengths and weaknesses of the policy, including its impact on stakeholders such as pregnant women and healthcare providers. Furthermore, the report addresses the standards of care, potential violations, and risk management strategies related to a case study involving a malpractice action. The analysis considers the APN's role as an administrator, practitioner, and educator, highlighting the importance of understanding healthcare policy and its impact on patient care and professional responsibilities. The report uses scholarly references to support its arguments and recommendations.

LEGAL AND PROFESSIONAL ISSUES IN NURSING
Name of Student
Institution Affiliation

LEGAL AND PROFESSIONAL ISSUES IN NURSING
Task one
Introduction
This paper discusses the New York reproductive Health Act (2019). The
Reproductive Health Act is a New York statute, which was enacted on Jan 22, 2019.
the statute expanded the abortion rights and eliminated several handles on abortion in
New York State. Before the passage of the law, New York law banned third-trimester
abortions except in cases where it was very necessary in order to save the life of a
pregnant woman(Raymond & Grimes, 2012). The laws were first proposed in the
legislature of New York state in the year 2007.
Summary of the policies and roles of APN in implementation
The RHA changed the previous law and allowed a pregnant woman to
terminate a pregnancy at any time necessary in order to protect the life and health of a
pregnant woman. The other main clause of the law is that it allowed any licensed
health care practitioner apart from physicians to perform abortions. However, for the
practitioners to perform the abortion, it has to fall within their scope as stipulated by
the law. The Reproductive Health Act of 2019 also repealed the criminality of
harming a child in the womb. Previously, the law stipulated that it was a criminal
offense to hurt a child in the womb. The RHA prior to repeal has if abortions
performed after the 12th week of pregnancy must be carried out in the hospital.
Abortions, after carried out after the 20th week, must have a standby physician to
provide medical care for an infant who might be born alive despite the chances of
being very low (Schalet, Santelli, Russell, Halpern, Miller, Pickering & Hoenig,
2014). The repealed section of the law provided that a child born alive during an
abortion procedure enjoy the protection of new york laws. Medical records must be

kept in order to offer care to the infant. The current law does not offer any protection
to an infant born during an abortion. With the repeal of the law, it was no longer
criminal to hurt a child in the womb but it was criminal to harm a pregnant woman.
The enactment of the law makes it possible for an Advanced Practioner nurse to
perform abortions in New York. This is because the law states that any licensed health
practitioner apart from physicians can assist a person to perform an abortion.
Strengths and weakness of the policy
The repealed Reproductive Health Act has both strengths and weaknesses.
One of the strengths of the new law is that it will the law will allow late-term
abortions even beyond the 20th week of pregnancy and hence make it possible to a
mother whose life is in danger to be saved. Apparently, cases of late abortions beyond
the 12th week are very rare (Shellenberg, Moore, Bankole, Juarez, Omideyi,
Palomino & Tsui, 2011). This is because, by this time, anyone who would have
wanted an abortion could already have procured one. It, therefore, means that most of
the abortions carried out in late pregnancies are emergency cases and most of the
people do not carry abortions during this time just for simple reasons. This law will,
therefore, make it possible for mothers to abort at any time during pregnancy when
faced with medical emergencies and hence will help save lives. The law will also
make it possible for licensed practitioners to carry out the abortions and hence this
will greatly increase access to abortion.
The weakness of the law is that it allows extreme forms of abortion without
any restriction. Late term abortions are very dangerous and could greatly endanger the
life of the mother. The law, therefore, encourages people to perform abortions late in
their pregnancy and it could result in very many fatalities. Additionally, the law does
not mention nor protect children born alive during abortions and hence it leaves a very

huge gap which needs to be filled.
Impact of the policy on consumer stakeholders
The law has a huge impact on consumer stakeholders who are pregnant
women willing to perform an abortion. The law will impact pregnant women
positively in that it will be possible to terminate pregnancies at any stage in case the
life of the mother is in danger. This will hence help to improve their health outcomes.
The law could also impact women negatively in that late abortions are very dangerous
and could result in the death of the woman (Jones & Jerman, 2017).
Impact of the policy on provider stakeholder
The provider stakeholders, in this case, include the physicians and the licensed
health workers who include APN. The law affects practitioners in that it gives them
more responsibility in determining the need to procuring late abortions due to medical
reasons. The law also removes the clause there it was a criminal offense to hurt a fetus
and hence offering to relieve to the medical practitioners carrying out the procedure.
References
Jones, R. K., & Jerman, J. (2017). Abortion incidence and service availability in the
United States, 2014. Perspectives on sexual and reproductive health, 49(1), 17-27
Joyce, T. (2011). The supply-side economics of abortion. New England Journal of
Medicine, 365(16), 1466-1469.
Schalet, A. T., Santelli, J. S., Russell, S. T., Halpern, C. T., Miller, S. A., Pickering, S.
S., ... & Hoenig, J. M. (2014). Invited commentary: broadening the evidence for
adolescent sexual and reproductive health and education in the United States.
Schellenberg, K. M., Moore, A. M., Bankole, A., Juarez, F., Omideyi, A. K.,
Palomino, N., ... & Tsui, A. O. (2011). Social stigma and disclosure about
induced abortion: results from an exploratory study. Global Public Health,
6(sup1), S111-S125.

Raymond, E. G., & Grimes, D. A. (2012). The comparative safety of legal induced
abortion and childbirth in the United States. Obstetrics & Gynecology, 119(2),
215-219