Good Samaritan Law Question

[Cameron]

One of the teachers in my High School just became a certified instructor for AED, CPR, and First Aid with Red Cross.

She is offering courses after school, she says that anyone is allowed to come and learn, but you can only get certified if you pay (Which is understandale). She then goes and says (in response to a question) "Its OK to use what you've learned (CPR/AED/First Aid) even if you don't pay to get the certificate. The only use for the certificate is to show someone you took the course."

Now, as far as I understand, your only protected under G.S.L. if you work WITHIN your certifications and proper authority (Only using skills up to CFR unless your currently working with a EMS Dept.). With that being said, if someone from her class doesn't get the certs. And they somehow do mess up on doing something, are they protected under G.S.L.?

 

[firecoins]

yes an uncertified person is the defintion of a good samaritan as they have no obligation to help. And some certifed would also be protected since they are under no obligation to act in an emergency. Neither person is an on duty responder.

 

[mycrofft]

But they need to prove they have a scope of practice to stay within.

Without a certificate or a letter from the instructor they lack that, and they might be acting beyond what a lay provider can be expected to do.
That said, if a life or serious injury is on the line, I'd act, but cautiously.

 

[Niccigsu]

what I learned about the G. S. L. in my AEMT class was that if you are NOT licensed or certified and you mess up then the G. S. L. law WILL cover you because you don't have a scope of practice to stay with in. Its when you have licensed EMS personnel trying to be a good samaritan and they mess up is when they can open themselves up to a lawsuit.

 

[Tigger]

Does taking a HeartSaver class actually "certify" someone in CPR, or are they just "trained?" There are differences under the eyes of law.

Furthermore does taking such a class actually give you a "scope of practice?" I don't believe it does since a scope of practice is usually given to a licensed professional of some degree.

Also, I am seeing CPR instructions being printed in major magazines (Popular Mechanics comes to mind), so clearly you can learn CPR without ever going to a class.

 

[Shishkabob]

If ANY lay person can do it, it should be covered by the law. An EMT can do 98% of they scope because most of it can be done by the law person, they just can't administer medications or anything of the invasive sort.




The key words with the "GSLs" is "wanton and willful negligence". If you KNOW you shouldn't do it, but do it anyhow, then you can be open to issues (though now they have to prove harm)

 

[medicdan]

Does taking a HeartSaver class actually "certify" someone in CPR, or are they just "trained?" There are differences under the eyes of law.

Furthermore does taking such a class actually give you a "scope of practice?" I don't believe it does since a scope of practice is usually given to a licensed professional of some degree.

Also, I am seeing CPR instructions being printed in major magazines (Popular Mechanics comes to mind), so clearly you can learn CPR without ever going to a class.

No, in fact we no longer offer lay responder certification cards-- the AHA has moved to "course completion" cards or certificates. Although the vocabulary is behind the times, certification is no longer the standard for lay responders, but "appropriate training", which places more responsibility for skill competency on the student than the instructor.

 

[mycrofft]

Calif has laws to protect licensees.

It protects licensees (MD, EMT, RN's) specifically.

 

[usafmedic45]

what I learned about the G. S. L. in my AEMT class was that if you are NOT licensed or certified and you mess up then the G. S. L. law WILL cover you because you don't have a scope of practice to stay with in. Its when you have licensed EMS personnel trying to be a good samaritan and they mess up is when they can open themselves up to a lawsuit.

There's no reason why an EMS provider while off duty should be doing anything more than a layperson should be doing in the same situation.

 

[Cameron]

I can see this has stirred up some controversy.

The main point that I am getting from all of you, is that it is really dependent on the situation.

 

[mycrofft]

Cameron, this isn't nuthin' .

Right up there with "duty to act" and "favorite pants/knife/gun".
And "Can I put lights on my private ride?".

 

[firecoins]

Right up there with "duty to act" and "favorite pants/knife/gun".
And "Can I put lights on my private ride?".

So do you have a a favorite pair of pants/knife/gun? I use my swiss army pants/knife/gun. Pants have plenty of holes in them.

 

[Tigger]

I can see this has stirred up some controversy.

The main point that I am getting from all of you, is that it is really dependent on the situation.

Psh this isn't controversy, it's discussion. As you note, there is no one correct answer. That said, I would like to see a lawsuit (successful or otherwise) in which the defendant was a non-medical professional that preformed CPR. Personally, I would not be afraid to provide compressions, as it going to be nearly impossible for anyone to show that I was either negligent or reckless. CPR is just to simple for anything to go that far awry.

 

[usafmedic45]

CPR is just to simple for anything to go that far awry.

Never underestimate the stupidity of your fellow man.

 

[Tigger]

Never underestimate the stupidity of your fellow man.

I spend most my days treating Division 1 athletes, so that mantra has been beaten into my head haha. Especially in early season, I'd say about a third of the injuries I manage are not a result of athletics.

Still, I just can't figure out how you screw up CPR so bad that you get charged /sued for negligence, especially as non-professional. They are dead, after all. Screwing up makes it harder to bring them back, but does not kill them, at least outside of the healthcare world.

 

[usafmedic45]

Still, I just can't figure out how you screw up CPR so bad that you get charged /sued for negligence, especially as non-professional.

I'm sure someone has done it before. I've seen a few cases at autopsy where you wonder what the hell they were doing to the person based on the location of the sternal fractures.

 

[usafmedic45]

Screwing up makes it harder to bring them back, but does not kill them, at least outside of the healthcare world.

The argument would be more or less that you deprived them of any chance at a positive outcome. Remember, at least from a legal standpoint, they are still alive until pronounced legally dead. It would be a hard case to prove but it still nonetheless is likely that someone at some time and some place has found themselves in court over this sort of thing.

 

[Tigger]

The argument would be more or less that you deprived them of any chance at a positive outcome. Remember, at least from a legal standpoint, they are still alive until pronounced legally dead. It would be a hard case to prove but it still nonetheless is likely that someone at some time and some place has found themselves in court over this sort of thing.

True enough, just cause I can't find a case doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

 

[jjesusfreak01]

Remember that we are dealing with a few issues here. We have to separate the concepts of training and licensure (or certification). Most of the things I do as an EMT do not require medical direction, even up to the application of O2. The state requires that to ride an ambulance as an EMT I need to have a certification, which is nothing more than proof of proper training.

If, for example, I were to roll upon a wreck or walk up to a cardiac arrest off-duty, there is absolutely nothing I could do that requires medical direction that is within my scope (unless I keep airway equipment in my trunk), which is to say I can pretty much do anything reasonable and be alright. A layperson can do hemorrhage control or CPR without needing a government issued certification.

GSLs usually protect people who are working within their level of training, not certification. They protect you from lawsuits in most states unless your actions are found to have been grossly negligent. If you are trained correctly to do a particular skill, say CPR, it will be extremely difficult to sue you unless they can show you did something exceedingly stupid, such as doing compressions on the person's neck, or doing compressions when they're awake. They also have to prove damage in most cases.

To summarize and answer the original question, you shouldn't have any problem doing CPR off-duty even without a certification, so long as you actually do know what you are doing.

PS: GSLs vary by state in the US, so look up the laws for your area to be sure.

 

[usafmedic45]

Or....take the simple route and don't get involved in less you're on duty.