Question for those in the medical field

[Working Man]

This is for the Paramedics, EMT, Nurses, and Doctors out there.
If you were ever evolved in a shoot were you came out on top and
unscathed would you render aid to the attacker?

Edit: Any lawyers want to give there opinion or any one else please do please do.

If the circumstances were, you are in a rather public place, there is only one
attacker, he/she is unconscious and disarmed, and bleeding heavily.

Would you feel compelled by you profession and the reasons you chose that
profession to render aid?

Would there be any liability in rendering aid if the attacker died, being that
you are trained medical personnel?

Would there be any liability if you did not render aid being that you are
trained medical personnel?

Do you believe that rendering aid would aid you in any legal or civil action
taken against you?

Just somthing I've been thinking about.

 

[ArmedBear]

I used to be an EMT.

The way California law works is that you are obligated to follow through completely ONCE YOU START GIVING AID. If you don't start, you are not liable. This is, in part, to prevent someone, say a doctor, from being obligated to act as a doctor when he/she is either physically or mentally unable to perform as one. The individual can make this choice, but only initially. without liability.

We have a "good Samaritan" law as well. It protects you from civil liability if you voluntarily try to help someone, then they try to sue you. HOWEVER, if you have any medical training, even EMT training which is rather minimal, you are not protected from liability within the scope of your practice. That means that you'd better do everything right, insofar as you can be expected to know what you are doing according to your certification.

Pragmatically, the best course of action would be to not start giving aid. Once you start, you're stuck. And you can be liable if you make any mistakes within the scope of your certification.

I'm not sure I would be willing to assume either liability, for someone who has just tried to kill me, especially when I'm probably shaking from a massive epinephrine rush and I have my own problems to worry about at that point.

I'd call 911.

California has good self-defense law. What it does not have is a good system of civil law. Civil liability, not criminal prosecution, is the greater concern here.

 

[Guns_and_Labs]

You also have to determine if you have a "duty to respond". If you do have a duty to respond, you must do so, and could be charged with abandonment if you do not.

However, and this is a big factor, your duty to respond only applies so far as you can WITHOUT PUTTING YOURSELF OR OTHERS FURTHER AT RISK.

Given the scenario you've outlined, I would maintain that until the scene is secured, I would have no duty to respond, and I would not treat until I could do so without putting myself at risk.

i.e., as ArmedBear said, "call 911".

 

[CAnnoneer]

If you render aid but screw up, there is no way to prove you did not do it on purpose. Any way you look at it, it is better to call in and stay put.

 

[ArmedBear]

Note that, if the guy is bleeding all over and I have no gloves, mask, etc., I am inherently putting myself at risk.

When I worked as an EMT, 20 years ago, we laughed at the idea of wearing gloves, and we laughed when we were puked on, shat on, etc. But we were young and times were different. Now, even some everyday civilians carry pocket CPR one-way masks, just in case, so they don't have to exchange fluids if they're trying to help someone who isn't breathing.

The way CA law is written, I believe you'd be far better off keeping your distance, but summoning aid with a cell phone.

 

[Can'thavenuthingood]

I think your best bet is to insure shot placement in a spot that precludes aid.

If you have to draw your weapon, you shoot to kill.

Vick

 

[Chipperman]

You do not shoot to kill, you shoot to stop the threat.

It just so happens that the most reliable way of stopping the threat is by killing them.

 

[MN_Strelok]

The first question any EMS person should ask: Is the scene safe?

If I just shot someone, it means they were threatening my life or the life of someone else. I'd have to assume they would still take the opportunity to kill me, should I approach. As such, they can lay bleeding on the floor until the PD show up to cuff and search.

Even after the PD's arrival, I'd probably be in no condition - mentally or physically - to render aid. Someone on duty can worry about that.

If the circumstances were, you are in a rather public place, there is only one attacker, he/she is unconscious and disarmed, and bleeding heavily.

You can't really assess someone's consciousness without approaching to arm's reach. So I wouldn't know if they're out or not.

ArmedBear answered your other questions quite well.

 

[MillCreek]

Speaking as a former paramedic, were I unfortunate enough to be involved in a shooting, I would render aid to the assailant to the extent that I was able and it was safe to do so. Now since I no longer ride in the big red and white truck with flashing lights, I would no doubt be limited in what aid I could provide, but I would certainly do my best.

For me, it would be an ethical issue. Civil or criminal liability would be the farthest thing from my mind at the time.

 

[Rich K]

Having worked in the EMS system for the last 15 years, I would call 911. I would not be in a proper state of mind to render aid to someone who just tried to kill me or one of my loved ones. Has absolutely nothing to do with liability.

 

[cpileri]

good samaritan

A doctor always has the choice wether or not to enter the doctor-patient-relationship, so he/she is not OBLIGED to render aid to anyone, legally.

Ethically is a different question.

Now, as to do so for the guy who just finished endangering you and now you've successfully defended against with deadly force; again remember that there is no obligation to do so.

Furthermore, if a physician gives medical aid, he/she is NOT usually covered by the "Good Samaritan" laws that would protect someone who does not have medical training if a bad outcome were to be attributed to the care provided. So unless you're SURE you can do a good job, or your locale does have laws to protect you (i.e. a good samaritan law); then a physician is at legal risk for offering help.

As for myself, the following must be true:
If neither me nor my interests are injured, and thus would receive my priority in rendering medical aid; and

If the scene is otherwise SAFE, and neither me nor my interests are in danger by staying near the scene; and

if the BG is DOWN, or can easily be incapacitated, to the point of not being able to harm me when I get within arms reach- which I would have to do in order to give aid; and

if I am reasonably in control of my faculties: a judgement call, sure. but if I am shaking from adrenalin and/or fear, if i had just wet myself, if i was so enraged that I was not thinking straight, or any other of a number of things possible in the aftermath of a shooting, that i could not give competent aid; then its a no-go. But if i was still in control of myself; and

there is no one else around;

then i probably would give aid. Why? Its the right thing to do, that's why.
A God-fearing physician has a duty to heal and to show mercy, which is an aspect of God's love.
Does the perp deserve it? No. But if he deserved it, it wouldn't be mercy. It would be justice. We are supposed to show mercy (by definition, to those who don't deserve it), and if the way I can do it is with medical care; then that's how I'll do it.

If i suffer legally for it: at least I'll know i did the right thing.

Happy St. Patrick's Day!
C-

 

[Working Man]

Thanks for the replies. This is something that has entered my mind from time
to time. I often wondered if others had thought about it or when presented
with the question what they thought their actions would be and why.

I have gone through BAT and was also a First Responder at my last job. My
schooling has also given me some tools to work with but I'm still not sure
what I would do. I guess it boils down to what state of mind I'm in at the
time.

 

[Lone_Gunman]

A wounded person is still a threat.

Putting away your gun and trying to help someone who moments earlier was trying to kill you would be a bad idea, in my opinion. He could easily attack you.

I would say a crafty attorney could use your attempt to render aide as a sign that you really didnt think the person was a threat, and you shot him accidentally. If you really thought he was going to kill you, why would you put away your gun, and get close enough to touch the person?

 

[ebd10]

I spent 8 years as an ER Tech in Detroit. Someone tries to kill me and I have to shoot him, he's got nothing coming from me.