Forums » Group W Forums » Moose Friends Network

 


Post new topic Reply to topic
Author Message
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jun 05, 2008 9:32 pm
  

User avatar
ArloNetizen

Joined: Jul 02, 2007
Posts: 86
Location: Eastern North America from Key West to points north
A bad, good idea, yes its admirable to want to assist or help still

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Terrie
Arlo Fanatic

"I always thought that if I saw someone, especially a child whose parents might not recognize it, having an allergic reaction/anaphylactic shock, I would administer EpiPen automatically. I wouldn't care about liability. "
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Liability is a major issue for trained responders. Especially where medical intervention is involved

Epipens are a presciption item and should be used under a doctors orders/direction by trained providers, Also they come in two variants, adult and children. Using the wrong medication is as, if not more dangerous for an individual with a life threatening emergency. If they have thier own Epipen helping them to administer a dose is one thing. Using one of your own on another person even with the right intent is a different subject.

Even Oxygen is a controlled medical item, yes, its less dangerous and often helpful still there are contradictions for its use as well in the field.

Then there are other legal ramifications based upon Societal/Religous beliefs.

And finally as long as a person is of legal age as an adult (to include Emancipated Minors) to decline assistance for them selves or as the Parent or Guardian of a minor, sometimes there is little you can do.

As former professional I can state; much as you may want to help sometimes you need to standby and get a signed release that the person declined care or was declined care based upon societal/religous beliefs of the Parents. Some things aren't lawful to do.

Still it is generally acknowledged that if a person is of an altered mental status or unconscious consent is implied for assistance.


          Top  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Jun 07, 2008 1:18 am
  

User avatar
Arlo Fanatic

Joined: Jan 09, 2003
Posts: 2493
Images: 5
Location: Rhododendron, Oregon United States
Larry wrote:
a passerby that offers no help of any kind could be charged with some sort of abandonment charge.


This is not true. If the person is a stranger to you, you can't be charged with abandonment. The Good Samaritan laws work like this: You have to stay within the scope of what you are trained to do in the situation you are in. What this means is that unless you are a doctor you act as a lay person. Nurses, emt's, etc are all working from either standing or direct orders from a doctor when they are on the job. As long as nurses, emt's, etc act as lay people when they are not under a doctor's supervision the Good Sam laws cover them. Current AHA guidelines (as of a couple of months ago) for first responders to a cardiac arrest are for compressions only. You don't have to put your lips on theirs at all. They are hoping this will increase the number of people that will respond.

Edited to say: Doctors are the ones that have to worry.


          Top  
Reply with quote  
 
Post new topic Reply to topic



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Jump to:  

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group