3 ms·

In the US and probably the rest of the English speaking countries, typically only medical professionals and first responders are required to render aid, but th

In the US and probably the rest of the English speaking countries, typically only medical professionals and first responders are required to render aid, but the law does protect "good samaritans" from legal culpability if they do help.

JshWright 10y ago
In the US, a 'duty to act' generally only exists if someone is 'on the clock'.
DINKDINK 10y ago
At least in California, Good Samaritan laws will protect someone if and only if they are rendering medical aid that is in line with their training. Meaning if you know CPR and attempt to resuscitate someone who has no pulse and they die / have brain failure -> the law will protect you. If you know CPR and try to remove a bullet from someone's brain and they end up in a vegetative states (IANAL but) -> law probably won't protect you.
- zeroflow 10y ago
  From my EMT course: The lawyer going after you would have to prove without doubt that the patient would clearly have survived if you didn't remove the bullet. In case of getting shot in the head, it's not very plausible that the patient would have survived anyways. From a actual lawsuit: Someone without the proper training started an IV which later caused sepsis and death. Since the patient was admitted to an hospital it was not clear if an improply placed IV caused the death or an improper care in the hospital.
dghughes 10y ago
There have been recent situations here in Canada where very ill people were literally on the doorstep of the ER asking for help but were refused any help. In nearly all the situations the staff in the building told the sick people outside to call 911 to get transported inside two feet inside the door. The hospital workers and by that I mean nurses and doctors were unwilling to help even though the people outside were very ill.
- knowtheory 10y ago
  So, the problem in Canada is that those policies are left up to each hospital or health unit to decide, and there doesn't appear to be a consensus (which is weird) http://www.cbc.ca/news/health/hospital-er-call-help-1.3686300 http://www.cbc.ca/news/health/hospital-er-call-help-1.368630...
- geoka9 10y ago
  So the problem was that those people couldn't get inside the ER by themselves and the nurses and doctors refused to move them? I ask because I once walked my relative into an ER and they were attended to, no problem.
  - dghughes 10y ago
    Yes sometimes it's a person literally on the doorstep of the ER in front of the doors. One time a news report said the person was in a passenger seat of a car. But usually right there at the ER in some state of distress. I can understand some concerns of staff but to flat out refuse seems to go against the ethics of being in the medical trade. I also suspect it's government bureaucracy and union rules, paperwork trumps life I guess.
deleted 10y ago
[deleted]
chanandler_bong 10y ago
Unless you have a "duty to respond", you are not required to act. Even if you are a paramedic with the local fire department, in uniform and walking down the street, unless you are on-duty, you do not have to act. You'd be a massive dick if you didn't, but there is no legal requirement.
- dreamcompiler 10y ago
  Correct. I was an EMT, and I would have been in no legal jeopardy for driving by an accident instead of responding, if I was off duty or outside my response area. (However, I always did stop and help if other responders were not yet on scene or looked like they could use more hands.) OTOH, my EMT license meant I was not protected by good samaritan laws. As DINKDINK pointed out, if I "helped" beyond the scope of my training, I could have been sued.

JshWright 10y ago

In the US, a 'duty to act' generally only exists if someone is 'on the clock'.

DINKDINK 10y ago

At least in California, Good Samaritan laws will protect someone if and only if they are rendering medical aid that is in line with their training. Meaning if you know CPR and attempt to resuscitate someone who has no pulse and they die / have brain failure -> the law will protect you. If you know CPR and try to remove a bullet from someone's brain and they end up in a vegetative states (IANAL but) -> law probably won't protect you.

zeroflow 10y ago
From my EMT course: The lawyer going after you would have to prove without doubt that the patient would clearly have survived if you didn't remove the bullet. In case of getting shot in the head, it's not very plausible that the patient would have survived anyways. From a actual lawsuit: Someone without the proper training started an IV which later caused sepsis and death. Since the patient was admitted to an hospital it was not clear if an improply placed IV caused the death or an improper care in the hospital.

dghughes 10y ago

There have been recent situations here in Canada where very ill people were literally on the doorstep of the ER asking for help but were refused any help. In nearly all the situations the staff in the building told the sick people outside to call 911 to get transported inside two feet inside the door. The hospital workers and by that I mean nurses and doctors were unwilling to help even though the people outside were very ill.

knowtheory 10y ago
So, the problem in Canada is that those policies are left up to each hospital or health unit to decide, and there doesn't appear to be a consensus (which is weird) http://www.cbc.ca/news/health/hospital-er-call-help-1.3686300 http://www.cbc.ca/news/health/hospital-er-call-help-1.368630...
geoka9 10y ago
So the problem was that those people couldn't get inside the ER by themselves and the nurses and doctors refused to move them? I ask because I once walked my relative into an ER and they were attended to, no problem.
- dghughes 10y ago
  Yes sometimes it's a person literally on the doorstep of the ER in front of the doors. One time a news report said the person was in a passenger seat of a car. But usually right there at the ER in some state of distress. I can understand some concerns of staff but to flat out refuse seems to go against the ethics of being in the medical trade. I also suspect it's government bureaucracy and union rules, paperwork trumps life I guess.

deleted 10y ago

[deleted]

chanandler_bong 10y ago

Unless you have a "duty to respond", you are not required to act. Even if you are a paramedic with the local fire department, in uniform and walking down the street, unless you are on-duty, you do not have to act. You'd be a massive dick if you didn't, but there is no legal requirement.

dreamcompiler 10y ago
Correct. I was an EMT, and I would have been in no legal jeopardy for driving by an accident instead of responding, if I was off duty or outside my response area. (However, I always did stop and help if other responders were not yet on scene or looked like they could use more hands.) OTOH, my EMT license meant I was not protected by good samaritan laws. As DINKDINK pointed out, if I "helped" beyond the scope of my training, I could have been sued.