To Stop or Not

[littlewingrn]

i didn't want to be a downer to another poster's thread about stopping and aiding at the scene of an accident (great job lovejoy88!!! i hope i would do the same), but i was curious about the laws in tx regarding giving aid at an accident site as a registered nurse. the following is from vernon's civil statues. if i am reading section b:3 correctly, because i work in a hospital and administer emergency care on a regular basis, i could be sued if i stop and render aid at an accident scene or while i am working in the hospital providing emergency care i could be sued (this part i already know). for the record, i hate that i am researching this in the event i should come across an accident and have this in my mind as a deciding factor on whether or not i would stop. very depressing.

texas good samaritan act

article 6701d, vernon's civil statutes ; chapter 74, civil practice and remedies code section 74.001

liability for emergency care

(a) a person who in good faith administers emergency care at the scene of an emergency or in a hospital is not liable in civil damages for an act performed during the emergency unless the act is willfully or wantonly negligent.

(b) this section does not apply for care administered:

(1) for of in expectation of remuneration;

(2) by a person who was at the scene of the emergency because he or a person he represents as an agent was soliciting business or seeking to perform a service for remuneration;

(3) by a person who regularly administers emergency care in a hospital or emergency room; or

(4) by an admitting physician or a treating physician associated by the admitting physician of a patient bringing a health-care liability claim.

(v.a.c.s. art. 1a (part).)

[classicdame, MSN, EdD]

I read it the same way, but am not a lawyer. If you are a member of TNA you can phone/email Cindy about practice issues to see how this has been interpreted in the courts in the past. I get the impression that people with advanced emergency skills are held to a higher level.

[usalsfyre]

Considering your pretty well limited to first aid interventions while off duty, how much could you get successfully sued for? Opening an airway and direct pressure moving to the application of a tourniquet are pretty hard to screw up...

Further, anyone can get sued for anything. You will be liable for the legal cos associated with getting the lawsuit dismissed.

There's lots of valid reasons not to stop. Legal liability really isn't one of them though.

[NurseLoveJoy88, ASN, RN]

I personally think it would be very hard to sue a nurse or any one that stopped if that person acted as a prudent person would.

[littlewingrn]

I agree with you all, and I do believe I would stop regardless if it appeared there were injuries and it was safe to do so. I would hate to think that by not stopping someone deteriorated to an unrecoverable point or didn't remain stabilized. Again, Nurselovejoy88, kudos to you! It is just sad that we even have to think about this at all.

[Isabelle49]

While in nursing school in Louisiana, it was made perfectly clear that professionals in our state are covered by the Good Samaritan Law.

[sugarmagnoliaRN]

I'm in Texas too and just recently got CPR certified... my understanding was that you can be sued only if you are acting on behalf of the hospital you work for... i.e. if you stopped at the scene of an accident and gave the best care you could within the scope of your CPR and first aid knowledge, you couldn't be sued. If you went outside of that scope, then you could be... I would think someone at your facility might be able to clarify that because B3 in the actual law does sound like you could be sued because of that. I know we're all very litigious these days but I really hope that someone wouldn't sue you for trying to save their life!

[tyvin, BSN, RN]

It's not like you could do too much at a scene anyway unless you bring a stethoscope out (don't do that) anyway, it's all about CPR or pressure points ... what else. Have confidence in your abilities and stop to render aid when appropriate.

[Owlune]

My CPR instructor explained that if you are a healthcare worker, or someone who should know better, and you cause harm (such as snapping off the xyphoid process), then you can be held liable.... because you should have known better. A Good Sam will have somewhat better protection from liability because there is no reason that they should have known better.

[NurseLoveJoy88, ASN, RN]

I agree with you all, and I do believe I would stop regardless if it appeared there were injuries and it was safe to do so. I would hate to think that by not stopping someone deteriorated to an unrecoverable point or didn't remain stabilized. Again, Nurselovejoy88, kudos to you! It is just sad that we even have to think about this at all.

I agree. Its' a shame that we even have to think about it.

[klm49]

One thing to keep in mind with all of this, is that anyone can sue for ANY reason. All it takes is an attorney to accpet the case. The act of being sued does not establish liability. To be held accountable and liable by the courts is another matter and requires a judgment. The question to look at is how many times has a lawsuit been successful and what were the circumstances? Last I read about; and it was several years ago; a judge dismissed a case brought against a medical person who acted as a first responder at an accident. The first responder was accused of moving the victim in an inappropriate manner resulting in worsening paralysis. The judge stated at that time that the Good Samaritan Law must be up held. If the law were not up held and precedent was allowed, no one would ever respond or stop to help. Even though the first responder SHOULD have known better; they acted with the intent to help not harm the victim and believed the victim to be in immediate danger. While additional damage was done by the responder; the responder was not liable for that damage. Part of the decision was also based on the fact that the responder was not receiving or expecting to receive compensation for the aid given. What is comes down to is not how likely is one to be sued but how likely is that suit to be successful? I think I will go research that one for myself.

[workingspaz]

Great question! I'm currently in pursuit of my online BSN and my online instructor ( who is a lawyer and a nurse) did a great job of explaining Good Samaritan. Her example was a medsurge nurse on her way in to work notices a car accident and pulls over to render aid. She notices pt having breathing problems and opens pt airway with chin thrust and remains until EMS arrive, then hands over care. Ultimately the pt suffers a bad outcome and sues everyone. The nurse is not held liable because she acted as a prudent nurse within her scope and performed CPR, stayed w/ pt then turned care over. The second scenario is same RN, who watched some medical show and sees the accident thinking "This is my chance to shine", notices the troubled breathing, proceeds to yank out a pen and wings an in the field trach placement. Pt dies of crushed larynx, family sues; family wins because it is outside her scope of practice and not what a prudent nurse would have done.

I hope the scenario helps place some perspective on GS and the protections we're afforded.