Good Samaritans

I think this new ruling is more of an advantage to those who have worse outcomes from accidents they are in. Now they can blame the person who tried to help them with causing more damage. I guess it will take a few deaths from people standing by doing nothing because they are scared they would get sued for trying to help. I would never stand by and allow someone to possibly perish because of my fear. I also think I would never tell anyone anymore that was an RN or even give my name to anyone, except the police and only if demanded by them. Sometimes anonimity can be your best friend.

Merry Christmas

I feel this ruling backs up what I used to teach in my first aid classes--do only what is taught in your class for your level of training and NEVER move an injured person unless leaving them there would cause death. This person reacted in panic, jerking someone out of a car before assessing the situation. This is not considered "helping" someone or providing medical care to someone who is injured. Her care didn't even meet the most basic guidelines--ask people who have never even taken a first aid class and they know NOT to move an injured person. She reacted, not acted, in a panic. There has to be some level of basic care and knowledge when assisting someone, and when this is violated, consequences happen.

So. Do you believe that it is a right thing to do to sue this person?

Wow, who would sue their friend who tried to help them, even if she didn't know what she was doing and actually caused more damage? The intent was to save a life, not to harm her. Whatever happened to compassion and forgiveness in this world?

By the way, you still can't be sued for providing medical aid at the scene of an accident. The person was sued because of the way the Good Samaritan law was worded - that you can't be sued for providing medical care at the scene of an accident. The lawsuit was upheld because the court determined that pulling her friend out of the car didn't constitute medical care, and she was the only person at the scene who thought the car was about to explode.

This new ruling will discourage people, simple people, from trying to save someone's life.
Today I read someone's joke about a new Good Samaritan law in California:
"When in danger or in doubt, run in circles, scream and shout" Funny? maybe, but I think it is rather sad...

Absolutely not! I can't image suing a friend under these circumstances!

It is my understanding that anyone, can be sued for anything at any time. Don't Good Samaritan laws only protect us from being held liable, not from actually being sued?

Frankly, I cannot live that way. If I am in a position to help, I will. I will not let an over arching fear of being sued prevent me from doing so.

And if it is not about friendship... if a person was a total stranger, does it make a big difference?

Yes, you are right. My mistake. Indeed, anybody can be sued for anything in our country.

Awsmom8, please do not feel intimidated by my question. I read your post and know how your Samaritan act saved one man life. They were lucky to have you there.
Unfortunately, not every time a med person will luckily be present at the emergency scene. Many times it is lay people who can come or decide not to come for help. And I think that the new California's version of Good Samaritan law will visibly decrease this number.

I had never known about this law before I came to America. I always acted on impulse: if one was in need and I could help, I helped. I was always told to be more cautious because the people are different, but I have never been. About Good Samaritan Law I heard in my nursing school and accepted it without questions. What a wonderful rule! "as long as you help without any expectation of payment or reward, you will be immune from liability for screwing things up (like a broken rib during CPR) while you're trying to help - as long as you don't screw up really bad."

I noticed that many people are afraid to intervene and prefer to keep neutrality. There were a few cases I can tell about. One case happened during my preceptorship in L&D unit. The husband of my patient (she was at the beginning of transitional stage with painful contractions) complained on his headache and asked me if I can give him Tylenol. Since I didn't have anything for headache in my purse and usually I have, I asked my preceptor how we can help this man and was told that we are not allowed to give him anything because he may sue the hospital if something would happen with him; and he was adviced to go and buy the medication at a local store (It was late, about 12 am and all close stores have been already closed). The man politely refused to leave his wife alone -- it was their first baby and he decided to stay and share every minute of pain with his wife.


OK, I wasn't born and raised here so maybe I don't get it. However, I still think that it is too much of being cautious. Come on, people. It is a hospital and a person is having a headache right under our roof, and we cannot help because we think about liability??? And now with this California's new Good Samaritan law... how many lay people will pass by without noticing a person on the ground or crashed car?