Nurse fired for refusing to see patients because of possible exposure to Covid-19

The day after the Covid-19 test was performed, the RN conducted a routine home visit with the patient for an unrelated problem. After being with the patient for roughly 25 minutes, the RN quickly went to her automotive and called the agency to specific concern in regards to the patient’s symptoms and possible exposure to Covid-19. The agency ordered the RN to proceed with other scheduled home visits that day and if she didn’t, she could be fired.

The RN emphasized that the patients she was scheduled to see that day already had existing conditions and he or she was concerned that she might expose them to the virus. The agency was adamant that it needed to follow its schedule and admit the remaining group of patients. The Supervisory Board refused and was summarily dissolved.

The patient called the RN just a few days later and reported that she had tested negative for the Covid-19 virus. The RN asked the patient to notify the agency, however the patient never did so. The RN assumed that the patient actually had Covid-19 because of the patient’s reluctance to contact the agency. The Supervisory Board also began to wonder if she had any remedies in reference to the termination of the employment contract.

RN account evaluation

RN’s account of the events that took place highlights several legal and ethical employment issues which have come to light with the pandemic. For example, in July 2021, I wrote about an LPN’s wrongful termination of her employment after she requested paid leave after contracting the Covid-19 virus. Other cases involved workplace questions of safety (e.g., lack of appropriate personal protective equipment) and skilled negligence and/or wrongful death claims after a patient died from COVID-19.

In this case, there is no such thing as a doubt that the RN’s refusal to confess other patients that day was legally and ethically justified. If the patient the RN was caring for did indeed have Covid-19, she would have been exposed to the virus. She could then potentially expose other patients in her care to this condition.

The law clearly requires nurses to be chargeable for their very own actions. However, if an RN follows the agency’s orders and other patients grow to be ailing because of this of her exposure to Covid-19, she could possibly be sued – alleging skilled negligence and/or wrongful death claims. Additionally, an RN may face skilled licensure proceedings by the state board of nursing for violations of skilled practice standards and conduct that has caused harm to the general public. Please note that the skilled licensing process doesn’t require that the patient actually caused harm. The basis for such conduct is a violation of standards of conduct and the nurse’s behavior. As a result, simply continuing to see patients on the day of potential exposure to Covid-19 could lead to a criticism from the patient or member of the family if either of them knew in regards to the prior visit and were concerned about potential exposure. Ethically, the RN has also met its responsibilities under the ANA Code of Ethics for Nurses and the recently published statement: Nurses, ethics and the response to the Covid-19 pandemic.

Analysis of the Agency’s response

The response of home health care agencies to RNs’ expressed concerns is of grave concern. His demand that RNs proceed to see patients no matter possible exposure to Covid-19 appears to have been based on concern for an absence of income moderately than the well-being of patients. The agency may face the identical legal liability as an expert negligence or wrongful death claim if the remaining patients contracted COVID-19 because of this of the RN’s exposure.

Termination of an RN’s employment because of refusal to see additional patients also increases the danger that the RN will sue her employer for firing her from her job retaliation for refusing to confess other patients.

Although the RN’s termination was for a special reason than the LPN’s termination discussed in my aforementioned blog, the effect is similar: penalizing the worker for raising an employment issue that is unlawful or contrary to public policy/public protection. I could be remiss if I didn’t mention one final point that applies to this example. The RN didn’t mention whether she wore a mask or followed current regulations CDC guidelines regulating patient care through the pandemic. She also didn’t indicate that she was or was not vaccinated against Covid-19. It is assumed that she complied, was vaccinated, and that the employer required all health care staff to be vaccinated and follow CDC recommendations. If this happens, the RN’s own potential exposure to Covid-19 and potential exposure to other patients could likely be reduced, making the agency’s stance require it to be more explicit about admitting patients. However, if the RN doesn’t follow these instructions and doesn’t get vaccinated and/or the agency doesn’t require vaccinations and doesn’t follow CDC guidelines, each could face prosecution for his or her actions. If so, their ethical obligations have also been clearly disregarded.