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.

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...

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

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?

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.

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?

"as long as you don't screw up really bad." I feel acting in a panic and pulling someone from a car is a really bad screw up...and the Good Sam act will still cover you if you render medical aid...but will not cover acts or incidents that do not involve medical aid. Removing an injured person from a car when danger is not present is not covered by the Good Sam act.

And unfortunately, everyone can be sued in this country! But this is a sad ending to an accident and no one will be a winner, even if the lawsuit is successful.

I was really upset when I heard the story on the news about the good samaritan getting sued. What is this world coming to? Now we won't be helping each other out because we're afraid that we might lose our house or property from being sued. I don't get it. I hope they work something out to revise the good samaritan law so we can be more protected. This new law will discourage people from helping each other out. We might as well think about charities, and not donate because of fear of getting sued!

I think everyone had the same knee-jerk reaction when they saw this story, but a closer read of what the court said makes it look much more reasonable. Basically, to summarize:

Good Samartain laws protect Medical Professionals, not laypeople

- the point of the law was to protect us when we render medical care in the field

- the point was not to give average people free reign to intervene however they choose in an emergency

We are still protected as long as we remain within our training, acting with reasonable care

- an RN who sees a car accident, and calls 911, immobilizes the C-spine, and gives CPR is still safe

- an EMT who extracts an accident victim from a car is still safe

- an accountant who decides to perform a tracheostomy with a butter knife is not

The girl in the story was likely drunk and acted like a fool

- the story about leaking fuel was contradicted by everyone at the scene, so she was probably making it up

Nobody has said she will actually be liable for anything

- this was a purely technical ruling, not a finding against the girl

- a trial will determine whether or not she acted inappropriately and actually caused a worsening of the initial injury; the plaintiff will have to show both before she has any hope of seeing a dime from her friend