| Course | NU 305 Professional Role Transition |
|---|---|
| Unit | Unit 2 |
| Paper type | Legal accountability analysis |
| Length | About 1,030 words, 6 pages |
| Format | APA 7 student paper |
| School | Herzing University |
| Program | RN to BSN |
| Updated | October 2026 |
Free sample paper for NU 305 Unit 2
Three Authorities, One Shift: Legal Accountability When a Floated Nurse Is Assigned a Heparin Infusion
Student Name
Department of Nursing, Herzing University
NU 305: Professional Role Transition
Instructor Name
January 26, 2026
Three Authorities, One Shift: Legal Accountability When a Floated Nurse Is Assigned a Heparin Infusion
The Situation
A composite registered nurse, Dana, has worked for four years on an orthopedic unit. At 7 p.m. she is floated to a cardiac step-down unit short of staff and assigned four patients, one of whom has a continuous heparin infusion titrated every six hours by a weight-based protocol against laboratory values. Dana has never titrated heparin; orthopedic patients on her unit receive subcutaneous anticoagulants. The hospital's float policy states that nurses floated to another unit "will be assigned patients within their competency," and that the charge nurse will "assist as needed." The step-down charge nurse is managing two admissions. The question this paper examines is what Dana is answerable for, and to whom, if she accepts the assignment, if she refuses it, or if she accepts it with conditions.
The Board of Nursing and the License
The board of nursing governs the license through the state's nurse practice act and rules. Across states, the practice acts share a principle: a nurse is accountable for accepting only those assignments for which she has the education, training, and competence, and for maintaining competence in the activities she performs. National boards' guidance frames this as a decision-making process in which the nurse asks whether an activity is within the scope of practice, whether she has the documented education and demonstrated competence to perform it, and whether she would accept accountability for the outcome, and stops if the answer to any question is no (Ballard et al., 2016).
Heparin titration by protocol is within the registered nurse's scope of practice. It is not within Dana's current competence. If she accepts the assignment without the support to perform it safely and an error harms the patient, the board can act on her license even if the hospital takes no action, because the board's standard is her conduct, not the employer's staffing needs.
The Employer and Its Policy
The employer sets policies that can be stricter than the practice act but never looser. The float policy here is consistent with the act: it promises assignments within competency. The employer's interest, however, is also to staff the unit tonight. If Dana refuses the whole assignment and leaves, the employer may treat her as having abandoned her patients or refused a reasonable assignment and discipline her under its policies, even though the board would not regard refusing an activity outside her competence as misconduct. If she accepts all four patients without saying anything, the employer may later say its policy was followed because she did not object. The employer's view of the same shift can therefore differ from the board's.
The Courts and the Standard of Care
If a patient is harmed and sues, a court decides liability against the standard of care: what a reasonably prudent registered nurse would have done in the same circumstances, established by expert testimony, published standards, and the hospital's own policies (Guido, 2020). Neither the board's decision nor the employer's discipline decides the lawsuit. A court could find that Dana breached the standard by titrating heparin without knowing how, and could also find the hospital liable for assigning her without support, since hospitals have their own duty to staff safely. It is possible for Dana to be cleared by the board, disciplined by the employer, and found negligent in court, or any other combination, because each authority asks a different question.
The Accountable Response
The response that meets all three standards is to accept the assignment with a condition stated clearly: "I'm not competent to titrate heparin. I can take these patients if a nurse who is competent manages the heparin, or I can take a different patient." Dana should say this to the charge nurse before accepting report, document the conversation and the resolution, and use the hospital's chain of command, the house supervisor, if the charge nurse cannot resolve it. This protects the patient first. It also meets the board's expectation that she not perform outside her competence, the employer's policy promising competent assignments, and the standard of care, which does not require her to perform a skill she lacks but does require her to act so that the patient receives competent care. Refusing the entire assignment and leaving would expose all four patients to risk and is not required by any of the three authorities.
Refusing the heparin titration is not the same as abandoning patients. Abandonment, in the board's sense, generally requires that a nurse has accepted responsibility for patients and then leaves them without a safe handoff. Raising a competence concern before accepting an assignment is the opposite: it is the accountability the practice act requires.
What the Hospital Owes the Floated Nurse
Accountability runs in both directions. A hospital that floats nurses between specialties takes on obligations of its own: to keep a record of each nurse's validated competencies, to match float assignments against that record, and to provide a resource nurse who can perform specialty skills when a float nurse cannot. On many units, a short float orientation checklist lists the high-risk activities, such as titrated infusions, cardiac monitoring interpretation, or specialty equipment, that a float nurse should not be assigned without prior validation. The composite hospital in this case had no such list, and its policy relied on the charge nurse to judge competence in the middle of admissions. After this shift, Dana could reasonably raise that gap through the unit's practice council or safety reporting system, since a policy that depends on each floated nurse speaking up is a policy that will sometimes fail.
What the Situation Shows About Accountability
The three authorities impose different obligations and can reach different conclusions about the same shift. A nurse who understands only the employer's view may accept unsafe work to avoid discipline; one who understands only the board's view may refuse in a way that exposes patients and invites employer action. Accountability in the professional sense combines them: act for the patient's safety within one's competence, communicate that clearly, and document it, which is also what the profession's code describes as the nurse's responsibility for her own practice (American Nurses Association, 2015).
References
American Nurses Association. (2015). Code of ethics for nurses with interpretive statements. American Nurses Association.
Ballard, K., Haagenson, D., Christiansen, L., Damgaard, G., Halstead, J. A., Jason, R. R., Joyner, J. C., O'Sullivan, A. M., Silvestre, J., Cahill, M., Radtke, B., & Alexander, M. (2016). Scope of nursing practice decision-making framework. Journal of Nursing Regulation, 7(3), 19-21. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2155-8256(16)32316-X
Guido, G. W. (2020). Legal and ethical issues in nursing (7th ed.). Pearson.
The Herzing NU 305 Unit 2 instructions
Unit 2 asks you to analyze a practice situation from the standpoint of legal accountability. Expect to describe the situation, explain the roles of the board of nursing, the employer and the courts, apply each to the facts and describe the accountable response. Many versions ask how the board and employer can reach different conclusions and what makes documentation protective. Check whether your section expects your state's practice act. Use a situation with real tension, such as floating or a questionable order. The NCSBN scope decision model is a useful tool. Accountability runs in both directions, so address what the organization owes the nurse as well. Documentation should record what was done and why, in factual terms.
How this NU 305 Unit 2 example is built
The analysis opens with the situation in a paragraph: who, where, when and what was assigned. Three sections then take each authority and explain what it governs and how it would judge the shift. The board section uses the practice act and the decision model. The employer section explains float policy. The court section explains the reasonably prudent nurse standard. The accountable response section scripts what the nurse says and documents. A section on the hospital's duties turns the analysis toward the system. The final section compares how each authority might conclude, showing that clearing one does not clear the others. Each claim cites a legal or professional source. The scripted words are short enough to say at a busy nurses' station.
NU 305 Unit 2 rubric: what full points look like
Herzing's rubric for a legal accountability analysis typically covers the situation as described, each authority's role, the application to facts, the accountable response, organizational responsibility and writing. Application to facts carries the most weight, since graders want each authority applied to this shift, not described in general. Authority points reward accurate roles for board, employer and courts. Response criteria look for a specific action and the words used. Organizational responsibility earns credit for duties the hospital owes. Documentation advice may be scored within the response. Ballard's decision tree and Guido's Legal and Ethical Issues in Nursing belong in the APA 7 list.
Common NU 305 Unit 2 mistakes, and how to avoid them
Accountability analyses in Unit 2 often slip by describing the three authorities without applying them to the situation. Another frequent problem is assuming that following employer policy protects the license automatically. Students often recommend refusing the assignment outright, without considering accepting with conditions. Documentation is described vaguely. The hospital's duties are ignored. The standard of care is confused with policy. State law is not cited. Finally, script the response, because graders want to see what the nurse would actually say and record, and a general statement about advocating for safety does not show how accountability is exercised. Another gap is forgetting that the practice act, not the float policy, defines what the license allows; a policy that asks for more than the act permits cannot protect the nurse.
Get a NU 305 Unit 2 example written to your instructions
Send the Unit 2 instructions and the rubric from your NU 305 classroom, plus your state and any scenario the assignment specifies. We write a custom example separating the three authorities and working a case where they diverge, returned in 24 to 48 hours. The first custom sample is free.
More NU 305 papers and RN-to-BSN samples
- NU 305 Unit 1: Scope and competency comparison
- NU 305 Unit 3: Code of ethics applied to a situation
- NU 305 Unit 4: Cultural humility self-examination
- NU 305 Unit 5: Escalating a clinical concern
- NU 305 Unit 6: Professional portfolio
- NU 305 Unit 7: Certification and specialty pathway analysis
- NU 305 Unit 8: Self-assessment against BSN competencies
- NU 345 Unit 2: Functional health pattern assessment
- NU 476 Unit 2: Practice gap evidenced at the site
- NSG 321 Unit 2: Staffing and assignment plan
- NSG 323 Unit 2: Family home visit assessment
NU 305 Unit 2 questions, answered
How can an employer clear me and the board still act?
Because they answer different questions. An employer decides whether you followed its policy and whether it wishes to continue employing you; the board decides whether your conduct meets the standard the practice act sets for holding a license. A nurse can survive an internal review and face board action, and the reverse happens too.
Can employer policy be looser than the practice act?
No, and understanding the direction matters. An employer may require more than the law demands, restrict what the act would otherwise permit, or set conditions of its own, but it cannot authorize you to practice beyond your legal scope. A policy that appears to do so does not protect you, and relying on it is where nurses get into difficulty.
What makes documentation legally strong?
That it records what was observed and done, contemporaneously, in terms that still make sense to a stranger months later. Gaps invite inference, late entries invite questions about why, and conclusions written where observations belonged are difficult to defend. Write what you saw and what you did, and the record supports you rather than requiring explanation.
Where can I find a free NU 305 Unit 2 sample paper?
Read the complete NU 305 Unit 2 float nurse accountability analysis here at no charge, three authorities applied and the scripted response. An analysis built on a different practice situation can be prepared on request.
Can a nurse refuse a float assignment?
A nurse can decline tasks outside their competence, but often the safer route is accepting with stated conditions, such as verification before an unfamiliar infusion. This sample scripts that response and explains how the board, employer and courts would each view it.