Treatment off duty

[Dobo]

Okay Here is a scenario I have wondered about, lets say I am off duty for the weekend and I happen to witness a motor vehicle collision I have a first aid kit in my car and am able to provide assistance, what sort of protections do I have in this case? ie Law suits etc.

Does provincial certification allow you to practice even when you are off duty? I am not going to sit on a scanner and rush to everything I hear to be a hero but if I see someone I can help I want to be sure I can give that help.

 

[KEVD18]

im having trouble holding stick man back...........................

 

[Jaybro713]

I see your from Ontario and honestly I don't know the laws there. But in most states in the US there is a Good Samaritan law that pretty much states that as long as you practiced within your scope of practice then you are safe. You attempted to help therefore you qualify under good samaritan and cannot be sued regardless of the outcome.

Now I'm sure if you were trying to perform a trachiotomy on the side of the road that there might be an issue. But stopping and rendering basic first aid you are covered.

 

[Dobo]

LOL yeah I am not going to do a trach with a pen on the side of the road but as long as I can render assistance and not have to make them sign a waiver first is all I want to know

 

[Jaybro713]

Like I said I know nothing about Ontario's laws on it. But I'm sure that they have something similar.

 

[medicdan]

KEV, you got to this before I did.
Dobo, you're new here. We like new people. We like new people better if/when they SEARCH before posting. It's okay if you dont search once or twice, but you have done this several times. KEV, bring on the stick man!
This subject has been brought up ad nauseum, as recently as Yesterday, at 1604 Eastern time.
Here are some recent results from the search you are soon going to run:
http://emtlife.com/showthread.php?t=9967
http://emtlife.com/showthread.php?t=10067
http://emtlife.com/showthread.php?t=6721

 

[Dobo]

Alright well chill out, there is a crap load to read on these forums and if I have a specific question I want to ask I am going to do it, I will try to use the search more but don't talk down to me like a child because I have not done it.

 

[KEVD18]

well with that attitude, i certainly wont be answering any of your questions. but dont fret, others here will, further perpetuating this cycle of insanity.

enjoy the forums!

 

[medicdan]

I see your from Ontario and honestly I don't know the laws there. But in most states in the US there is a Good Samaritan law that pretty much states that as long as you practiced within your scope of practice then you are safe. You attempted to help therefore you qualify under good samaritan and cannot be sued regardless of the outcome.

Now I'm sure if you were trying to perform a trachiotomy on the side of the road that there might be an issue. But stopping and rendering basic first aid you are covered.

Jaybro, you are from MA, so here are the MGLs-- just so you know what you are citing.

MGL TITLE XVI.
Chapter 112: Section 12V. Exemption of certain individuals rendering emergency cardiopulmonary resuscitation from civil liability

Section 12V. Any person, whose usual and regular duties do not include the provision of emergency medical care, and who, in good faith, attempts to render emergency care including, but not limited to, cardiopulmonary resuscitation or defibrillation, and does so without compensation, shall not be liable for acts or omissions, other than gross negligence or willful or wanton misconduct, resulting from the attempt to render such emergency care.

The normal good sam laws specifically exclude EMS providers from the exclusion in liability.
There IS a provision for EMS providers, but the protection it provides should not be confused with the liability of malpractice.

Chapter 111C: Section 21. EMS personnel; good faith performance of duties; limitation on personal liability

Section 21. No EMS personnel certified, accredited or otherwise approved under this chapter, and no additional personnel certified or authorized under section 9, who in the performance of their duties and in good faith render emergency first aid, cardiopulmonary resuscitation, transportation, or other EMS, to an injured person or to a person incapacitated by illness shall be personally liable as a result of rendering such aid or services or, in the case of an emergency medical technician or additional personnel, as a result of transporting such person to a hospital or other health care facility, nor shall they be liable to a hospital for its expenses if, under emergency conditions, they cause the admission of such person to said hospital.

Please, Dobo, do a search. I'm really not trying to be condescending. We have discussed this specific question here before, ad nauseum. We end up in the same circular argument, threads get closed, people offended, etc.

 

[Dobo]

Well if you feel that my questions are not worthy of your response that is fine, all I am saying is that I am a grown adult and don't want to be talked down to because I didn't do something as trivial as use the search button. Others were kind enough to simply answer my question and put the thread to rest.

 

[Dobo]

Jaybro, you are from MA, so here are the MGLs-- just so you know what you are citing.

The normal good sam laws specifically exclude EMS providers from the exclusion in liability.
There IS a provision for EMS providers, but the protection it provides should not be confused with the liability of malpractice.


Please, Dobo, do a search. I'm really not trying to be condescending. We have discussed this specific question here before, ad nauseum. We end up in the same circular argument, threads get closed, people offended, etc.

I do promise to use search more and I appologise for the incident

 

[Jaybro713]

Jaybro, you are from MA, so here are the MGLs-- just so you know what you are citing.

The normal good sam laws specifically exclude EMS providers from the exclusion in liability.
There IS a provision for EMS providers, but the protection it provides should not be confused with the liability of malpractice.


Please, Dobo, do a search. I'm really not trying to be condescending. We have discussed this specific question here before, ad nauseum. We end up in the same circular argument, threads get closed, people offended, etc.

Thanks for clarifying. I actually was misinformed and appreciate the correction!

 

[WuLabsWuTecH]

My understanding is that also most places exclude EMS from good samaratan laws.

We are such a litigious society that I do not believe it prudent to risk it.

on the other hand, yo should also make sure you don't have a Duty to Act law that REQUIRES you to stop and render aid.

 

[Dobo]

My understanding is that also most places exclude EMS from good samaratan laws.

We are such a litigious society that I do not believe it prudent to risk it.

on the other hand, yo should also make sure you don't have a Duty to Act law that REQUIRES you to stop and render aid.

Does this not fly in the face of what we do and are trained to do, I mean we are in a position to help but hindered by law from doing so? Makes no sense

 

[Sasha]

Alright well chill out, there is a crap load to read on these forums and if I have a specific question I want to ask I am going to do it, I will try to use the search more but don't talk down to me like a child because I have not done it.

Where was he talking down to you?

 

[karaya]

Who elected you guys Search Czars? So what if he (Dobo) asks a question that may be repetitive? If people here don't feel like responding to repetitive questions, then that's their prerogative.

But, from the looks of other threads, there are plenty of people here who don't mind chiming in to lend Dobo a hand. And I might add they did so in a polite manner. Furthermore, I can't find anything in the Community Rules that states one must "search" before posting a thread.

Take some medication and give the guy some slack.

 

[tatersalad]

can't find the popping popcorn smiley.....

 

[traumateam1]

Who elected you guys Search Czars? So what if he (Dobo) asks a question that may be repetitive? If people here don't feel like responding to repetitive questions, then that's their prerogative.

But, from the looks of other threads, there are plenty of people here who don't mind chiming in to lend Dobo a hand. And I might add they did so in a polite manner. Furthermore, I can't find anything in the Community Rules that states one must "search" before posting a thread.

Take some medication and give the guy some slack.

Thank you! I am getting a little sick of everyone jumping down a new persons throat because they didn't do a search before posting.

If someone posts a question/topic that has already been posted and you don't want to "waste your time" reposting the same answer than just don't answer. In the time it takes you to b!+ch and complain, you could have posted a perfectly good answer. I mean, how many times have you (generic you) posted "use the search" etc etc when a good answer could have taken just as long. Or when you do find the other threads yourself, why not copy the link and your reply.

 

[medicdan]

Thank you! I am getting a little sick of everyone jumping down a new persons throat because they didn't do a search before posting.

If someone posts a question/topic that has already been posted and you don't want to "waste your time" reposting the same answer than just don't answer. In the time it takes you to b!+ch and complain, you could have posted a perfectly good answer. I mean, how many times have you (generic you) posted "use the search" etc etc when a good answer could have taken just as long. Or when you do find the other threads yourself, why not copy the link and your reply.

If you note, I did comment on not searching, I posted some other threads that answer the question AND I answered the question re: Good Sam laws.
Here, I will repeat what others have said, so that I can OVERTLY answer the question-- no ambiguity:

Okay Here is a scenario I have wondered about, lets say I am off duty for the weekend and I happen to witness a motor vehicle collision I have a first aid kit in my car and am able to provide assistance, what sort of protections do I have in this case? ie Law suits etc.

Does provincial certification allow you to practice even when you are off duty? I am not going to sit on a scanner and rush to everything I hear to be a hero but if I see someone I can help I want to be sure I can give that help.

Dobo, What an interesting question! You live in Canada, and I live in the United States, so I dont know much or anything about provincial or federal laws relating to liability.
Your choice to stop and care as opposed to calling it in, as opposed to the EMS Salute is going to be dependent on a few things:

1) Where you are. How far away is an ambulance? PD? FD? Urban? Suburban? Rural? There isnt much point to stopping if an ambulance is less than a few minutes away. Is PD already on scene? Why dont you call and make sure they are rolling?

2) Who you are. Are you a volunteer EMT/FF in the area? Are you on call? Are you going to be paged to this call within 2 minutes? Are you an EMT/PCP/ACP/XYZ? Do you have current certification? In the US, unless you are on a ambulance or fire truck, you have the SOP of a first responder.

3) What you have. Do you have a pair of gloves? A reflective vest (at night or on the highway)? Do you have some gauze or something to hold pressure? a c-collar? Mobile ICU in your trunk? If you cant do much to help, you arent much good on scene. Also beware where you park, if you decide to stop. Do you expect your supplies to be replenished?

4) How serious it is. Is the car smoking? Are there obvious immediate life threats? Think about scene safety for yourself.

Okay, lets review. In the US, whatever your training, you are a FR when alone/off-duty. Even if you think you are covered by Good Sam, you really aren't, and are opening yourself up to major litigation.

Towns/cities/counties keep minimum staffing levels for a reason-- they have enough people to handle any calls that come up-- they dont expect bystanders to stop, and can handle the call themselves.

My short answer, asses, make a decision, and in most cases, let the duty crew deal with it.

Am I making sense? Was this clear enough?
Trauma, can you comment on local laws and procedures?

DES

 

[karaya]

Okay, lets review. In the US, whatever your training, you are a FR when alone/off-duty. Even if you think you are covered by Good Sam, you really aren't, and are opening yourself up to major litigation.

What do you base this on? I did some research on this topic a little while ago and found the opposite. Many states do include EMS, Fire, Police, etc. as part of their good Sam law. Massachusetts is specific about this in their doctrine:

Section 14. No emergency medical technician certified under the provisions of this chapter and no police officer or firefighter, who in the performance of his duties and in good faith renders emergency first aid, including, but not limited to, the use of any semi-automatic or automatic external defibrillator or transportation to an injured person or to a person incapacitated by illness shall be personally in any way liable as a result of rendering such aid or as a result of transporting such person to a hospital or other safe place, nor shall he be liable to a hospital for its expenses if, under emergency conditions, he causes the admission of such person to said hospital.

Although there is always a risk of suit, they are rare and even more seldom do they ever get to court. In my state, Missouri, there has never been a successful suit brought on as a result of a Good Samaritan violation.

I have found that the fear of being sued while rendering aid off duty is more anecdotal EMS than reality.