EMT I 2802 Posted November 24, 2007 Posted November 24, 2007 I think the bottom line here I my case would be if you don't act like a moron when my crew gets there and can show me a first responder, EMT-B, EMT-I or Medic card and you seem to have a clue and we need help jump in but with out the card in hand or if you act like a moron you need to step back or be removed case dependent :wink:
heather_21_2006 Posted November 25, 2007 Posted November 25, 2007 If it was me, (and I have done this) stop if no one has. Only to get important info to give to the dispatcher i.e. # of pts, # of vehicles, and if they are out of the vehicle or if they are trapped. I wouldn't do anything other than that. Too many people on a scene is just asking for someone else to get hurt.
AnthonyM83 Posted November 25, 2007 Posted November 25, 2007 Here in CA EMT's have a duty to act if you come across a medical emergency . As long as you work within the box ( don't go outside your certification ) and don't look for compensation , you've got legal protection as said in the other posts .Woah, totally missed this until now. EMTs do not have an automatic duty to act if you come across an emergency on your off time. IF you did have a duty to act, though, you wouldn't be covered by Good Samaritan laws...like when you're on-duty. As I understand things. If you always had a duty to act, when establishing a case of negligence, you wouldn't have to prove you had a duty to act, as one of the commonly cited 4 criteria for negligence....it would instead be assumed b/c you always had a duty to act.
spenac Posted November 25, 2007 Posted November 25, 2007 Woah, totally missed this until now. EMTs do not have an automatic duty to act if you come across an emergency on your off time. IF you did have a duty to act, though, you wouldn't be covered by Good Samaritan laws...like when you're on-duty. As I understand things. If you always had a duty to act, when establishing a case of negligence, you wouldn't have to prove you had a duty to act, as one of the commonly cited 4 criteria for negligence....it would instead be assumed b/c you always had a duty to act. Exactly. Now many states do have statutes that require people in general to stop and render aid, if they are first at the scene. Myself I stop at times at other times I try and get a quick triage report so dispatch can get proper equipment dispatched. But as far as car very little I can do with no equipment.
firemedic05 Posted November 25, 2007 Posted November 25, 2007 I learned this lesson the hard way, unforunately, by stopping at mvc and cutting hand trying to pull door open. I have found out that with out an ambulance, suction equipment, monitor, and jaws of life ie cutting hand, that you usually can't control your emotions or willingness to help. Call 911 just in case everyone else hasn't , and that is your best option. Not to sound crass, but in a couple of years, you will realize you can't save the world!
spenac Posted November 25, 2007 Posted November 25, 2007 Not to sound crass, but in a couple of years, you will realize you can't save the world! NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO, Next you'll say theres no Santa Claus ( ever notice change letters in Santa, it spells Satan ), No easter bunny ( never understood how a symbol of fertlity came to be a part a supposed christian holiday ), Oh well. Noooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo.
emtstudent50595 Posted February 23, 2008 Posted February 23, 2008 you should always help thats what ems is
JonathanGennick Posted February 23, 2008 Posted February 23, 2008 ... but if I were to see an accident before or after EMS got there, should I get out to help? This sort of situation calls for some judgment. If EMS or police or fire is already on scene, then I'd be very, very reluctant to stop unless there were some overriding and obvious reason to do so. If responders are already on scene, then I'd just be getting in the way by stopping. Besides, I don't ever carry my EMT cert with me, so I have no way of proving to anyone who I am. If no response is on scene yet, I would consider stopping. But again, some good judgment is called for here. Busy freeway in big city with lots of traffic? I'm probably not stopping. Family or kids in the car with me? I'm probably not stopping. Lonely back-road in the remote area where I live? Then I would probably stop. In the end, you have to make a judgment call. Have other people likely already phoned in the accident? Is an official response going to be close and quick? Does it really and truly look like it will be all down to you to call for help and get an official response started. I've personally not stopped for a wreck in some 20 years, and not at all since becoming an EMT. Once I saw a car spin off the road in my rearview mirror. That was last year on a freeway downstate. Weather was bad. Son was in the car with me. No safe way to turn around. Plenty of other traffic to call 911. I let it go. I didn't stop. Wouldn't have been safe. And would have taken me 15-20 minutes to get off at one exit and circle safely back to the scene. Heh. I don't even like car wrecks. I've been working as an EMT for about a year and a half now, and I'm happy every day that a shift goes by without a wreck.
Dustdevil Posted February 25, 2008 Posted February 25, 2008 you should always help thats what ems is No. You should not stop. You are not "ems" off duty in your 1974 Pinto station wagon. You're just Joe Citizen. Let EMS do their job. They'll be there soon enough.
Recommended Posts