When the nurse inserts an ordered urinary catheter into the client's urethra after the client has refused the procedure, and then the client suffers an injury, the client may sue the nurse for which type of tort?

Choice A rationale

Battery in a legal context refers to the intentional touching of another person without their consent. Inserting a urinary catheter into a client's urethra after the client has explicitly refused the procedure constitutes a non-consensual physical contact. Even if the procedure was ordered, the lack of consent transforms the act into battery, especially if it results in injury to the client.

Choice B rationale

Dereliction of duty, a component of negligence, involves a failure to meet the accepted standard of care. While inserting a catheter against a client's will could be seen as a failure in ethical and potentially professional standards, the specific tort of battery focuses on the unauthorized physical contact, regardless of whether it was done negligently or with intent to harm (though intent to touch without consent is present).

Choice C rationale

Assault involves an intentional act that creates a reasonable apprehension of immediate harmful or offensive contact. While the client may have felt threatened or apprehensive when the nurse proceeded despite their refusal, the actual insertion of the catheter and subsequent injury constitute battery, as physical contact occurred. Assault precedes battery; battery is the actual physical contact.

Choice D rationale

Invasion of privacy pertains to the wrongful intrusion into a person's private affairs or the public disclosure of private information. While a client has a right to privacy regarding their body and medical procedures, the act of physically inserting a catheter against their will, leading to injury, primarily constitutes a physical violation and lack of consent, which falls under the definition of battery.