Re: really...
Without knowing the details, would it have been negligence if they were following a printed protocol exactly and it didn't tell them to double check the maths, and check the scales calibration and a host of other things?
Yes, a jobsworth giving somebody an overdose of a drug would have been negligent even if they'd have followed their instructions to the letter. They would also have been likely to be charged with (and found guilty of) manslaughter if the person they gave the overdose to died.
A risk assessment is not some arcane mystery, but a simple assessment of risks. In this case, it need not have taken more than a couple of lines.
1) What are the risks? Overdose, or erratic behaviour described on safety warnings on bottle.
Control measures.
A) Discover dose level at which point this activity becomes clinically dangerous. Not sure what this is? Ask a pharmacist or other responsible and competent adult.
B) Start with small drug dose (1/10th of $max limit = $quantity) and dose up to max limit in increments while recording changes in activity. The max limit shall be set to 80% of the clinical "safe" level for safety purposes and will not be exceeded.
C) Measure twice, cut dose once when dealing out drugs that you can overdose on. Person taking drug to be briefed on risks involved, OD symptoms and should check dose measurement.
These control measures devised in mere moments would have prevented the problem. This is not some form of weird issue either- it's a lack of basic responsibility and common sense on the part of supervising adults which almost led to fatalities. Pretty shocking advert for the university.
Biting the hand that feeds IT
