http://www.annuvia.com/Content/NewsItems/CAGoodSamaritanAnalysis_final_2_6_09.pdf

What can be done to improve the outcome is to provide the population with free First Aids courses, starting from schools.

But we shall not sue people for their attempts to help. The result will be obvious — lack of help when it is needed.

Thought for the Day 2
“…principle that has been around since before any good samaritan legislation existed…” but came into being some time after the Good Samaritan existed.

Even in this case you are discussing, the “rescuer” (to use the same inverted commas to indicate doubt as you have deliberatly done) believed that the car was going to catch fire, and did what they thought was the correct action. Even if they did not think the car was going to catch fire, their action was done with the best of intentions….to rescue someone from an accident. Did she know that there was a spinal injury? No. Did she know that her actions would cause further injury? Of course not! Did she know that the car was not going to catch fire? Of course not! Did she know the car was going to catch fire. Of course not! Did she know that the best couse of action was to do nothing? No of course not! Was she simply doing what she thought was the best thing to be done? Of course. Was she ‘flaunting any sense of reason or due care caused’. Well leaving aside your deliberate use of inflamitary language to justify your point, no. She doing what she thought was the best in the circumstances she found herself. Also remember one important fact. She did not cause the spinal cord injury. The crash did. She may have made it worse by her actions, but she did not cause it, and she certainly did not set out with the intention of doing harm or making the situation worse. As she was trying her best in an emergency situation to do what she thought best, I am very certain that she was not thinking whether she was “flaunting any sense of reason or due care”, but I suppose she is not a lawyer with years of superior reasoning and learning to help decide what to do (or I suppose in your case…not to do) in an emergency.

“As for your personal behavior in past emergencies, I commend it. You probably won’t lose your house and savings over a broken rib.” And what if that broken rib had punctured a lung, causing a collapsed lung and possible heart attack. How does that change things now? (Love the get-out word ‘probably’ by the way. Said with a certainty that will bring heart to all those wondering if they should step up to the breach.)

“We should all keep in mind how we would feel if our mother or sister or wife were rendered paraplegic…..”. And we should all bear in mind our thoughts if our sister or wife were burnt to death whilst a “rescuer/lawyer” pondered whether their actions were going to performed with a sense of reason or constitute due care.

I have come across an accident involving a biker where the onlookers were not treating him. As I went to move him because he was not breathing, I was told that I should not be doing anything because I would be sued. He survived, and did not end up a paraplegic because there was no back injury. Read the bit of that story again where they were all prepared to let someone die because they might be sued. People’s fear of having their life ruined by lawyers has overcome any sense of helping their fellow man. THAT is the bedrock of our legal system.

Ironic you say “Bad Samaritan”, since a Bad Samaritan is the person that does nothing to help those in need.

Damages should be paid only from the auto-insurance coverage.