Multiple benefits discussed previously.
Six programs in the area over 40 years with no complications. And the skills of the graduating medics are top of the line. I suppose you could chalk it up to luck. But then again, the military has done it for ages with minimal oversight without any issues I know of. I believe it would be VERY easy to justify the use of IVs on live people.
What's the difference? In my experience, you're getting even more supervision doing them on other students than in the hospital on patients, every student knows the risks and has accepted them, and every student is cleared to a level of competency before doing it on others.
I'm glad to hear that those programs have been just that - lucky. Look at the complication rate for any procedure in any hospital or setting - eventually, there will be a complication. Nothing is 100%.
In terms of risk management (and I hate that RM sometimes makes decisions for us, but let's face it - it is what it is), the question is always, "Once we've done everything we can to mitigate the risk, is that risk worth the benefit?" I agree that sticking other students is one path to building excellent skills. However, I also believe that it's not the ONLY path, and furthermore, I don't believe it's any more likely to build a proficiency than sticking a dummy and clinical patients. In fact, I agree with several other replies here that the only way to build true skill is to practice that skill repeatedly.
So while you may decide that each student receiving a small number of sticks is an "acceptable risk," you should also ask yourself, "How many times do our students have to stick each other to meet the goal (skill proficiency)?" and "Why is this risk necessary when there are other avenues?"
Lastly, when a student signs up for a class, I doubt there is a section in any release they sign holding your facility (and instructors, by the way) harmless for all the potential complications of an invasive procedure. And if they signed it the first day of class, I find it even more difficult to believe that a jury would find that it was an informed consent. I'd be even more interested in whether or not your insurance company will stand behind you.
Let me lastly say that I hope it doesn't sound like I'm judging your programs or any other. If it works for you, great. But I would hate to see any "excellent" program grind to a halt because of an unnecessary risk - and in a lot of places, it would only take one....
Respectfully,
NJM