WuLabsWuTecH
Forum Deputy Chief
- 1,244
- 7
- 38
Question:
Everybody around here says that good Samaritan laws do not apply to off duty EMS personnel. Which is why we are taught, if you stop to help, you do so at your own risk. But I decided to read the actual law today and it states as such:
----------(From the Ohio Revised Code)-----------
2305.23 Liability for emergency care.
No person shall be liable in civil damages for administering emergency care or treatment at the scene of an emergency outside of a hospital, doctor’s office, or other place having proper medical equipment, for acts performed at the scene of such emergency, unless such acts constitute willful or wanton misconduct.
Nothing in this section applies to the administering of such care or treatment where the same is rendered for remuneration, or with the expectation of remuneration, from the recipient of such care or treatment or someone on his behalf. The administering of such care or treatment by one as a part of his duties as a paid member of any organization of law enforcement officers or fire fighters does not cause such to be a rendering for remuneration or expectation of remuneration.
Effective Date: 08-18-1977
--------------End Copy---------------
So based on that, I'm just wondering if anyone else interpreted it as not covering off-duty EMTs since we are not rendering aid for remuneration?
I'm wondering if this that they are teaching us is just a myth that has been handed down for so long that it has become ingrained in our collective mind?
Thanks,
-Wu
Everybody around here says that good Samaritan laws do not apply to off duty EMS personnel. Which is why we are taught, if you stop to help, you do so at your own risk. But I decided to read the actual law today and it states as such:
----------(From the Ohio Revised Code)-----------
2305.23 Liability for emergency care.
No person shall be liable in civil damages for administering emergency care or treatment at the scene of an emergency outside of a hospital, doctor’s office, or other place having proper medical equipment, for acts performed at the scene of such emergency, unless such acts constitute willful or wanton misconduct.
Nothing in this section applies to the administering of such care or treatment where the same is rendered for remuneration, or with the expectation of remuneration, from the recipient of such care or treatment or someone on his behalf. The administering of such care or treatment by one as a part of his duties as a paid member of any organization of law enforcement officers or fire fighters does not cause such to be a rendering for remuneration or expectation of remuneration.
Effective Date: 08-18-1977
--------------End Copy---------------
So based on that, I'm just wondering if anyone else interpreted it as not covering off-duty EMTs since we are not rendering aid for remuneration?
I'm wondering if this that they are teaching us is just a myth that has been handed down for so long that it has become ingrained in our collective mind?
Thanks,
-Wu