Act of Heimlich Maneuver: Reasons for the Duty of Medical Treatments
The occupational activities of the nursing staff include the evaluation to the patient, nursing treatments, nursing advise, nursing consulting and other medical assisted treatments. The eating-situation of the patient would be one of the evaluation to the patient. Nursing staff have the responsibility of compensation for the damage, if the occupational activities didn’t follow due diligence and the patient was injured as the result. A Nurse in the disputed case didn’t notice that the patient was choking during eating, since the patient had problems with masticating. The first and the second instance of courts confirmed that the nurse was against due diligence that the situation of the patient should be noticed “at any time” and “closely” and therefore had the fault. After appealing, the judgment was abolished and the disputed case was remanded. Than judgement that the nurse had no fault in this case was made by the first remanded court. The issue whether the nurse against due diligence and the duty of emergence is about the core concept of fault, i.e. possibility of foresight and of consequence-avoiding. Starting with explanation of the actual situation and justification, this article would comment the remanded judgement with reference of theories and legal practice, especially focusing on possibility of foresight, of consequence-avoiding and of act, whether the justification in this judgement was proper.