Crimes vs Torts

[AmericanChai]

I'm having a hard time distinguishing between these with the examples given on some practice exams. What is an easy or very clear way to tell the difference??

One example given was a nurse feeding a client and the client was spitting food all over her. She got angry and shoved a napkin in the client's mouth. That was a crime. I had guessed tort b/c it sounds like assault and battery to me.

Second example: a nurse had ignored the client's rising BP all day and the client had a stroke. That was a tort. I had guessed crime because it caused great harm to the client-- but now I'm thinking this was malpractice.

Help!

[TheSquire, DNP, APRN, NP]

Malpractice is a specific type of tort. A tort is a harm done to someone else. In order to prove malpractice, four elements must be present:

• Duty
  
• Breach of Duty
  
• Proximal Cause
  
• Harm
  

A lack of any of the four means that a tort case will be thrown out of court. Your malpractice insurers' lawyers (and you do have malpractice insurance already, right?) love those kinds of cases.

A criminal tort is done intentionally, and one goes down the assault and battery or criminal neglect route. All other torts are civil in nature.

The former example was assault and battery, and thus a crime.

The latter example involved the nurse's duty to act (responding to the pt's rising BP), breach of duty (neglecting the rising BP), proximal cause (high BPs are well-known to cause hemorrhagic stroke), and actual harm (the stroke). As such, it was malpractice.

[locolorenzo22, BSN, RN]

I always figured out that if it had intent, it was a crime...

Ignoring symptoms or not performing a duty...client choking not doing the hemlich manuever because of ignorance, a tort....but the previous response was right on!