Decreasing Nurse Educator Liability
The nurse educator’s liability lies in the possibility of an error occurring due to the passing of the wrong information to the students. Therefore, the nursing educator could be held liable for misguiding the students that he or she has the responsibility of assisting (Christensen 2016). The law requires that the nursing faculty and the educators working under it should always provide factual information and training to their students. Therefore, teaching the students negligently may lead to inaccurate information getting to students (Patton & Lewalle 2015). This may end up being applied to a patient, complicating the case further. An educator can be prosecuted for providing false or inaccurate information (Pressler & Kenner 2014). The nursing educator has the role of providing the correct references to the students. Therefore, all the information that the students claim to have learned from the educator must have the correct sources attached. The nursing faculty, therefore, applies various strategies to counter educator liability.
First, the faculty enhances continuous training for nursing educators. This works in ensuring that the educators are well-equipped with the actual information pertaining to the clinical processes. With the continuous training procedures in place, the educators are updated on any changes in the provision of clinical services (Glendon et al, 2016). Another strategy applied by the faculty is deep research on clinical services. This allows the faculty to determine the accuracy of the past data and the accuracy of the content being delivered by the educators (Hinkel et al, 2015). The other strategy involves having experts in the faculty from time to time. The educators have the chance to interact with the experts and pose questions to them. This acts as a good chance to verify anything that might be in doubt.
Therefore, the mitigation examples included in the nursing faculty revolve around getting to know the truth. For instance, the faculty arranges educators’ training from time to time (McNeil et al, 2015). They are vetted from time to time to determine if they deliver the right content to the students. Better strategies are taken up to cover the chances of loopholes.
Christensen, L.S (2016). The academic performance of students: Legal and ethical issues. In D. Billings and J. Halstead (Eds.), Teaching in nursing. A guide for faculty. (5th ed). (Chapter 3, pages 35-54). St. Louis, MO: Elsevier
Patton, C.W. & Lewalle, L.P. (2015). Legal issues in clinical nursing education. Nurse Educator DOI: 10.1097/NNE.0000000000000122 (Publish ahead of print area)
Pressler, J.L. & Kenner, C.A. (2014) Navigating legal issues in academic nursing. Nurse Educator, 39(6), 261-262.
Glendon, A. I., Clarke, S., & McKenna, E. (2016). Human safety and risk management. Crc Press.
Hinkel, J., Jaeger, C., Nicholls, R. J., Lowe, J., Renn, O., & Peijun, S. (2015). Sea-level rise scenarios and coastal risk management. Nature Climate Change, 5(3), 188.
McNeil, A. J., Frey, R., & Embrechts, P. (2015). Quantitative risk management: Concepts, techniques and tools. Princeton university press.