Quality of care is the type of care that a patient is given in a hospital institution that lacks any form of negligence. The duty owed by the hospital is ensuring that the patient always receives quality care while he or she is in the hands of its doctors or nurses (biotech.law.lsu.edu, 1965).
Does it make sense that the Hospital was liable at all and, if so, paid a far greater amount in damages?
In my opinion, it is highly sensible that the hospital was held liable for damages that were incurred by Darling. This is because above all the medical practitioners, the person who should be directly liable are the hospital since it is the one that has the competitive process of choosing the employees and in addition to that, it also carries the audit process to ensure that its employees serve well (biotech.law.lsu.edu, 1965). Therefore, even though Dr. Alexander was the culprit, it was quite sensible that the court charges the hospital the higher amount since it was the one which had not carried out a clear audit and personnel management in order to discover the traits of the doctor.
Is Dr. Alexander deserving of some sympathy as well?
It is not right that the doctor receive any sympathy. This is because the actual mess in question was brought forth by the doctor. This shows that had the doctor been keener, the patient would have been happier and also given better services (biotech.law.lsu.edu, 1965). Therefore, the doctor does not deserve any sympathy in my opinion. On the contrast, he should be the one to blame for the whole situation since apart from causing the damage that he literally did which is he put the whole hospital in a mess.