Some of them try. Other countries have good samaritan laws you know?
I see nothing wrong with the current system. What if some idiot comes across your unconscious body and decides that you probably have a brain hemorrhage and decides to try to let the pressure out by using his dirty box cutter to perform an emergency post temporal lobechtomy cutting out the portion of your brain he thought was swelling in order to prevent damage to the rest of your brain? Still shouldn’t be able to sue? (Well your family shouldn’t be able to sue since you are now unnecessarily in a permanent vegetative state when all you needed was a cool towel since you were only suffering from heat exhaustion but he was just trying to help…
Seriously, I don’t actually know how the current laws work with regards to ‘reasonable actions’, I’m more concerned that apparently even reasonable actions won’t save me if I’m giving non-medical assistance.
I don’t know about you, but given that newspapers are written for a sixth grader’s reading level so that the general public can understand them, I don’t think I want a “jury of my peers” deciding what whether or not I was an unreasonable idiot or not if I don’t absolutely have to.
When I took CPR training the very first thing they did was try to undo two scary myths:
That you’ll be sued if you touch a victim
That you can be charge/sued for not helping if you are certified, but don’t act
With all the effort that went into telling people that yes, it is okay for you to try and save someone’s life, this ruling is disheartening. People will die because bystanders will be afraid to help. Even with the Good Samaritan Act, the risk of law suit is still a huge factor in discouraging help when it is needed.
Taken from the 2004 Hearing before the Committee of the Judiciary House of Representative considering the Good Samaritan Volunteer Firefighter Assistance Act of 2003, and Nonprofit Athletic Organization Protection Act of 2003.
These acts were proposed because personal injury suits are so out of control that the existence of volunteer fire departments and sports associations have been imperiled.
Now the average person is going to be at risk for helping. Even if they are trained, qualified, know what to do, and do the right thing, they will still probably be sued.
That’s your point. Everyone else’s point is that, like it or not, the knowledge that you may have to pay a lawyer to defend your actions as reasonable is possibly going to cut down on the number of people willing to be Good Samaritans.
The crux of the matter is that we have to decide, as a society, where the risk/benefit ratio is minimized. The CSC has weighed in, now it’ll be up to the Legislature to let their decision stand or to rewrite the law.
It seems the SC of CA has a different opinion. They do not make the law. They interpret the law as written. If their interpretation is contrary to what the law really intended then my guess is the law was shoddily written and needs some major overhaul. Where do you get that the law as written would have wanted a different outcome in this case? Inquiring minds want to know
It seems to me that, like in most cases when judicial resolutions are criticised, it is really the law which should be criticized. The justices are just the messengers, no need to shoot them.
Of course, it might be too much to ask that people actually know and understand the workings of the government and how the laws are made by the legislative and not by the judges.
Proper CPR breaks ribs a lot. Some experts feel that if properly done, it will cause fractures in 100% of adults. But many fractures are not big enough to be seen by standard post-mortem studies.
Well, I stand corrected on that. QTM is the expert. I never to my knowledge fractured anyones ribs when administering CPR. But QTM is the MD around here if he says it’s common I won’t argue.
Well, if someone doesn’t know how to find a pulse, I don’t want him giving me medical attention. I’ll take my chances waiting for the paramedics.
The amount of time it takes a trained professional to tell if I need CPR or not.
ETA: I’m not saying that I never want people to help me ever. But from the opposite side of the coin, I disagree that no one should ever be held liable when attempting to give me medical attention. If the person acts in ignorance and great disregard for my safety, due to a mistaken belief in their medical knowlege or ability to handle emergencies, and causes me grievous harm, then they should be held liable.
I HOPE you suffer one of your unlikely scenarios that makes your point, ie being harmed by an incompetent “helper” and that you “get” to sue their behinds. Hey, you might be permanently maimed or finacially devestated, but “proving” your point should be well worth it!
Or, better yet, that you are in dire straights and NO ONE does help you because they are worried about lawsuits from the likes of you.
Or even better still, you help someone and they sue you penniless because their lawyers definition of reasonable differs from yours.
Its real easy to talk the talk. I really hope you get to walk the walk one day.
I know this is the Pit, but come on!
I could say this: I hope once you’re sitting in a car with a minor back pain after an accident and someone forcibly drags you through the window and drops you on the pavement, in the process breaking your spine and paralyzing you. Then you’ll get to thank the person for helping and show us what a noble person you are.
If you know enough to tell for sure I can no longer breathe on my own, then go ahead and crack a rib. If you’re going to start pounding on me because I just fainted for a minute, just make sure you avoid the testicles and stay in the chest area.
I’m not sure what this means. Are you saying that the best course of action is for me not to check anything, but immediately start the CPR if I see someone lying motionless on the ground?
Wow, I didn’t insult you. I didn’t call you names. I wasn’t mean to you. I just had a different opinion. And you feel that way. Dude you’ve got more problems than mere stupidity…
