Ethics Case Study: Medical Law and Ethics Jerry McCall is Dr. William's office assistant. He has received professional training as both a medical assistant and an LPN. He is handling all of the phone calls at the office while the receptionist is at lunch. During this period of time, a patient calls and says he must have a prescription refill for Valium, an antidepressant medication, called in right away to his pharmacy, since he is leaving for the airport in thirty minutes. The patient notes that Dr. Williams is a personal friend and always gives him a small supply of Valium when he has to fly. No one except Jerry is in the office at this time.

Does Jerry's Medical Training Qualify Him to Refill the Order?

While Jerry's medical training qualifies him to receive a prescription order and transcribe it accurately for other nurses or physicians to implement or transmit to a pharmacist to dispense, Jerry does not have the authority to refill the patient's medication, as renewing/refilling/extending a prescription/order is considered originating a prescription (MBN, 2010, p.1). While the dilemma presented to Jerry by the patient at hand may sway Jerry's ethics, his medical training underlines the fact that under no circumstance is Jerry allowed to refill the medication, especially if there are no further refills depicted on the prescription bottle. In a situation such as this, the only option Jerry has is to refer the patient to another doctor who may be able to more immediately assist them, or reject the patient's request outright, citing that his or her physician may be able to assist them further when Dr. Williams returns to the office. Despite the time constraints the patient has explained, and the ethical dilemma raised by their impending departure, the circumstances of Jerry's medical credentials remain unchanged, leaving him unable to assist the patient in this manner.

Does Critical Medicine Alter the Decision to Refill?

Even...

Though the patient at hand may assert his or her frustrations with the situation, and Jerry may undergo an ethical dilemma in his own mind regarding the patient's time constraints and the need for medication, the repercussions that Jerry could face if he decided to call in a refill could prove extremely detrimental to his employment status or his licensure.
Doctrine of Respondent Superior

The doctrine of respondent superior, which literally means "let the master answer," states that in many circumstances, an employer is responsible for the actions of employees performed within the course of their employment (Lloyd, 2010, p.1). In a situation such as this, should Jerry decide to refill the medication, malpractice suits would likely be filed against Jerry and against Dr. Williams or any other physicians who hold stake in the practice. In malpractice cases involving physicians and nurses, a healthcare organizations credentialing process is questioned and can be revoked, recoveries and damages to injured parties are paid largely out of pocket, and physicians held responsible for employee actions are often held as directly culpable for the incident that took place, even in situations where the respective physician was not present (i.e. Jerry's situation) (Nowicki and Summers, 2004, p. 95).

As the case study does not specifically state whether or not Jerry, as an LPN an acting member of the physician's office, holds his own form of medical malpractice insurance, it can be inferred that such a circumstance as that previously-stated in which Dr. Williams is held accountable would go into effect.

Legal and Ethical Issues

While the legal ramifications of Jerry's decision to refill could cause significant damage to his career, Dr. Williams' career, and those affiliated with the…