Physician-patient relationships are a vital component in the healthcare system administration since the healthcare fraternity deals with services from the physician that focuses on the health of the patient. The core value of a physician is to treat the patient rather than treat the disease. Firstly, the definition of a profession is to show of competence. Physicians have the oath of professional ethics that protect the welfare of the patient. Consequently, Kovner, Knickman & Jonas (2011) affirm that the physician should work towards winning the confidence of the patient. This can be achieved through proclaiming the competence of the physician through protection of life. Therefore, relationship between the physician and the patient is vital for co-existence of these professional ethics (Gagan, Gagan, & Gagan, 2002).
According to Kovner, Knickman & Jonas (2011), physicians have skills in disease preventive methods. Patients need these skills very much. For one to engage in one’s own health care, he or she needs knowledge, skills and emotional support. This implies that activities that aim at cordial relationships between the patient and the physician would facilitate activities that engage sharing of ideas on disease preventive methods. This is only achievable through collaborations that would end new infections with the result of a healthy society.
Thirdly, enhancing a collaborative relationship between the patient and the physician could lead to reduced fear over testing and diagnosis of some deadly diseases that patients keep to themselves, for instance, AIDS. Talking of this relationship would help patients to gain confidence in health tests that could lead to early diagnosis of communicable diseases (Kovner, Knickman & Jonas, 2011). This step would help the physician to combat the disease at early stages before its vulnerability is beyond control. This could also lead to curbing the spread of the disease as the patient gets advice on how to deal with the disease. Hence, the patient-physician relationship is justifiable.Want an expert to write a paper for you Talk to an operator now
Schulz & Johnson (2003) assert that the tenure systems of performance of duties by the medical practitioners are under contractual terms. The nature of this condition is such that if it is broken through ignorance of the law, it warrants the innocent party to effect a discharge of the contract. On the other hand, breach of warranty gives the innocent party course for action against the damages. In the medical fraternity, these contractual terms and breach of warranty are a situation linking negligence to protection of life or intention to take away innocent life. The medical professional ethics stipulate the correlation between putting life of the patient first against anything else. This is according to the oath of office. However, there are situations when patients succumb to prevent death. In this case, the patient’s relatives have a right to sue the physician to seek justice from available institutions. If discharge of the case is fair, the innocent party will treat the contract as discharged. In case of evident atrocity on the part of the practitioner, there would be substantial breach of the warranty, which is a breach of the subsidiary rules stipulated in the main purpose of the contract.
According to Buckley & Okrent (2004), a person who alleges negligence, must prove it using the following elements. Firstly, a duty of care that is payable by the physician since physicians owe their patients. This value seeks to challenge any doctor who agrees to treat a patient to do so in a professional manner that intentionally or unintentionally causes harm to the patient.
Khan, Robson & Swift (2002) are of the opinion that the patient might prove with the injury that he or she suffered. The injury can be an open defense to prove the negligence since most of the injuries are physically observable. In the case of negligence leading to infection of a certain ailment, the patient should provide tests to prove that indeed he or she is infected. This would help in justification against negligence.
Thirdly, the patient must prove that indeed the injury was caused because of negligence. This is critical since there are chances that the injury was due to physical factors rather than alleged negligence (Pozgar, 2007).
Fourthly, there must also be supporting evidence that there was a failure by the doctor to perform the standard care. This deals with the type of practice and care including prescription of drugs or conduct of duty through emergency services like first aid. This might help to prove negligence since the care given to the patient is a reason for better or poor health.
The governing board of the health care corporation has different functions and duties. It has the responsibility of setting rules and regulations of code of conduct within the cooperation. This ensures a harmonious program that ensures activities happen at the right place and at the right time. The board also appoints committees that review and enhance stipulated policies to become fulfilled. It is also the mandate of the board to oversee the management of resources to incorporate human as the vital resource that fosters improvement of service delivery. The board carries out recruitment of practitioners to the cooperation. Consequently, it has the duty to discharge duties of all employees and maintain functionality of the cooperation.
Schulz & Johnson (2003) indicate that the board of directors also appoints senior members to the board, who include the chairperson and other members. It then stipulates roles to these members and ensures service delivery in accordance with the stipulated roles.
Lastly, the governing body reviews the bylaws for cooperation depending on the conflict of interests. This happens on an annual basis, to keep cooperation within the ever competitive and changing global pace. Above all, it oversees all the activities within the cooperation.