Psych nurse has affair with patient, he sues....

[Sylph]

Is the nurse at fault? It was a hot, steamy affair with a psych patient, leading to chaos and problems for him. Now, he's suing the nurse and the hospital.

It started with an innocent game of chess between a patient and his nurse. But it quickly evolved.

Soon, the pair were having sex all over the hospital — in his room, the staff lounge, examination room.
But their clandestine encounters went beyond the walls of the Centre for Addiction and Mental Health on Queen St. W. When permitted to leave the hospital for a few hours on a community pass, the good-looking 6-foot-3 patient met the woman at a nearby hotel.
According to the statement of claim, John alleges Jane was negligent in her treatment when she failed to discourage a social relationship, refused to respect professional boundaries and neglected to consider the harm that would result from violating them.

The hospital, it alleges, failed to arrange for appropriate supervision, inspection and monitoring of John at his home. Had they checked on him, John says, they would have discovered her lingerie, strewn about his apartment.


It’s an unusual tale that has been pieced together from his clinical notes, a CAMH report and an $850,000 lawsuit recently filed in an Ontario Superior Court.
https://www.metronews.ca/toronto/Local/article/84252

["Mad" Miles]

As it should be. Anybody in a custodial relationship with another person has to maintain professional bounderies. If they don't the responsible party is the custodian, not the one in custody. Where I work this is emphasized over and over again.

In my case it doesn't apply to sex, I'm so straight I cut like a razor, but it does apply to personal favors of any kind. I cross that line and am caught, I get "walked out" (summarily fired and escorted from the institution) and could possibly end up behind bars depending on the violation. Being sued by the other party is the extra pile of crap on top of all that.

This is no joke, the situation as described makes it seem fun and sexy, but that nurse was taking advantage of someone in a situation where they did not have control over their own life. No matter how sexy, tall, handsome or seductive the patient was/is, he was/is a patient. She was the nurse. There's no grey area here.

If the genders were switched it would be just as egregious, perhaps more so.

(Well OK, if after he was released they got together, that might be a different story. It depends on the rules of the institution where she worked.)

Let me add that I'm not a big fan of rules and bureaucratic institutions. But when the rules make sense, as they do in this case, I will defend them and adhere to them.

Now, sex among those in custody? That's a whole different set of questions...

"Mad" Miles

:burngrnbounce:

[Braggi]

As it should be. Anybody in a custodial relationship with another person has to maintain professional bounderies. If they don't the responsible party is the custodian, not the one in custody. Where I work this is emphasized over and over again. ...

You are, of course, correct. However, in this case, as in any, what damage was caused to the victim and what is it worth?

That is one of the very tricky problems in any case such as this.

I doubt many juries will support the guy's case. This sounds like a "get rich quick" scheme. Settle for some tens of thousands and everyone gets on with their lives. We have a weird legal system.

No, I don't know how to fix it.

-Jeff

[MsTerry]

You are, of course, correct. However, in this case, as in any, what damage was caused to the victim and what is it worth?

That is one of the very tricky problems in any case such as this.

I doubt many juries will support the guy's case. This sounds like a "get rich quick" scheme. Settle for some tens of thousands and everyone gets on with their lives. We have a weird legal system.

No, I don't know how to fix it.

-Jeff
Jeff, we might have a weird legal system, but this was filed in Ontario....................
As your wife knows, relations with people that depend on you for mental guidance, is a big nono. The harm done, might not be apparent immediately, but the judgment of the caretaker is definitely questionable.

[Lenny]

Quote:
Braggi wrote: https://www.waccobb.net/forums/waccobb/orangebuttons/viewpost.gif (https://www.waccobb.net/forums/showthread.php?p=64712#post64712)
You are, of course, correct. However, in this case, as in any, what damage was caused to the victim and what is it worth?
That is one of the very tricky problems in any case such as this.
I doubt many juries will support the guy's case. This sounds like a "get rich quick" scheme. Settle for some tens of thousands and everyone gets on with their lives. We have a weird legal system. No, I don't know how to fix it.-Jeff


Jeff, we might have a weird legal system, but this was filed in Ontario....................
As your wife knows, relations with people that depend on you for mental guidance, is a big nono. The harm done, might not be apparent immediately, but the judgment of the caretaker is definitely questionable.

System seems weird but when you think about it, it's the only thing that may work. Monetary settlement always seems weird, but it beats losing body parts for infractions and I don't know what else would substitute.
Jeff reflects "everyguys" response, but the law IS blind when applied, and that is what the judge will tell the jury, "this reading is the law, and can you apply it to the instance before you" and their answer has to be YES. And as Miles pointed out, those holding custody bet their life that such will not happen. Protects everybody, kind of like a Mexican standoff with all the guns on the table.

[Braggi]

...
Jeff reflects "everyguys" response, but the law IS blind when applied, and that is what the judge will tell the jury, "this reading is the law, and can you apply it to the instance before you" and their answer has to be YES ...

Oh, you folks missed my point. I wasn't saying the infraction was OK because it was a guy getting laid. And Lenny, the question doesn't have a yes or no answer. The question in a lawsuit is "How much is this baby worth?" That's what's weird. If I was on the jury the answer would be zero.

Yes, I think the caretaker stepped out of bounds. Is there permanent damage? Not from what I've read. Perhaps the reality is different and I could be convinced, but the arguments would have to be strong and the burden of proof would be great or I'd vote for little or no payment.

-Jeff