Pleases make sure I have addressed all questions. News of your health law studies has circulated throughout your network and brought advice-seekers out of the wood-work. Your Cousin Herbert, a skilled surgeon, phones you up to seek a bit of free advice regarding the hospital's "request" that he serve as an observer of new staff members (and those requesting new privileges) to confirm their competence to maintain the privileges they have been conditionally granted. His job is simple, observe a surgery, report back to the hospital. These are not doctors in training but rather fully licensed doctors who want to practicefor the first timeat the hospital or want to practice a new service or procedure at the hospital with new privileges.Herbert wants to know what his exposure is and how he can avoid any liability or other costs related to his service.You explain to Herbert that potential exposure to liability in the world of treatment is primarily negligence-based, and must be analyzed from two liability perspectives (the hospital's and the physician's). Explain each liability perspective in its own single sentence. Herbert is concerned that if he doesn't take over if he sees something he thinks is not appropriate care, he will be liable for any injuries the patient suffers. Explain in one sentence what is missing for Herbert to be liable for his own failure to intervene in the patient's care. Patient physician relationship. Explain in one sentence what is missing for Herbert to be liable for the actions or inactions of the surgeon he is supposed to observe on behalf of the hospital. Herbert must establish the patient physician relationship once established he is responsible for what happens to the patient. However, if he doesn't establish the relationship he is not responsible. The hospital told hi to simply observe, he is not acting in the capacity of a surgeon. Herbert asks whether he would be in a better position if he does intervene. Explain in one sentence what changes with regard to negligence liability if he does intervene. Once Herbert intervenes while the patient is unconscious he has established the relationship he then becomes liable. Explain to Herbert in one sentence what, beyond negligence, some patients have sued "intervening" doctors for when the doctor they engaged didn't do the job. The intervening doctor commits battery if the patient states they didn't want any other surgeon. News of Herbert's concerns has circulated through the hospital C-suite, as well. In one sentence for each "perspective", explain how the hospital might be liable whether or not Herbert intervenes. In one sentence, explain how potential liability changes for the hospital if Herbert intervenes (and the "perspective(s?)" implicated). Prevention is the best medicine and the best law. List three ways the hospital could help mitigate its concerns and Herbert's regarding the appropriate conduct in this situation and manage the risks of liability. Dear Mr. Herbert: You inquired about your hospital's "request" that you serve as an observer of new staff members (and those requesting new privileges) to confirm their competence to maintain their conditionally granted privileges. You want to know your exposure and how you can avoid any liability or other costs related to your service. Potential exposure to liability in the world of treatment is primarily negligence-based and must be analyzed from two liability perspectives (the hospital's and the physician's). In similar situations where things have gone south in surgical cases, the judicial court found hospitals must monitor patient conditions; they are not only facilities that house patient care services (Thompson v Nason Hospital, 1988). Under the doctrine of corporate liability, if the physicians are employees, respondeat superior applies, and the hospital may be liable for negligence. From your explanation, the hospital has only authorized your observation of the surgeries. Thus, you cannot provide any care to the patients in this position. If you interject without permission, you have created an un-permitted touching of the patient by you or your actions, which is a medical battery (Shuler v Garret, 2014). To be liable for your failure to intervene, you must have an established relationship with the patient. You don't have a relationship. Upon intervention, you have established a relationship with the unconscious patient and stepped out of your observer position (against hospital instruction) and are therefore liable for what happens. There are three ways the hospital could help mitigate its concerns and Herbert's regarding the appropriate conduct in this situation and manage the risks of liability. Working together as a team, Root Cause Analysis, and Sentinel Event Measure of Success (McGowan, Wojahn, Nicolini, 2022). These processes allow employees to safely express concerns, work with the hospitals to put procedures in place to ensure the safety of patients, and address unexpected events that may effectively intervene in safety procedures (McGowan, Wojahn, Nicolini, 2022). In summary, in the doctorate of corporate liability, the hospital is liable if you act in the scope of your job only as an observer. You are responsible if you establish a relationship with the patient and operate within that relationship. Please let me know if I can be of further assistance. Respectfully, Michelle Gordon-Releford References McGowan, J, Wojahn, A & Nicolini, J. 2022. Risk Management Event Evaluation and Responsibilities. Statpearls Publishing. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK559326/ Thompson v. Nason Hosp., 370 Pa. Super. 115, 535 A.2d 1177, 1988 Pa. Super. LEXIS 21 Shuler v. Garrett, 743 F.3d 170, 2014 U.S. App. LEXIS 2772, 2014 FED App. 0033P (6th Cir.), 2014 WL 563272