Re: Medico-Legal Operational Question

[Guest guest]

Let's review the elements of negligence. First, there must be a duty to

act. Second, a breach of that duty. Third the breach must be the proximate

cause of an injury. Fourth, the injury must be capable of estimation in

damages.

Let's look at your scenario.

Once dispatched, you have a duty to the patient to respond to that call.

You are committed to that patient, as is the system.

Now, if you encounter another emergency on the way, your actions depend

entirely upon the capacity of your service to handle multiple calls.

Normally, you would continue to your assigned call, but you would call your

dispatch and ask them to send units to the new emergency.

If you are involved, then you notify dispatch and another truck will be

dispatched to your call.

If you have multiple trucks available, dispatch may send another truck to

cover your call if it can either get there in the same time as you would or beat

you. This happens all the time in large systems where one truck enroute is

disregarded because a closer unit becomes available.

However, if the second truck is going to be late getting there, that may

cause a problem.

So it's all about duty, and the right of a patient who is relying upon your

service to respond to receive a timely response.

In some systems they may attempt to telephone triage the calls and either

upgrade or downgrade based upon balancing priorities. Bad. VERY BAD.

Telephone triage seldom gets it right, Dr. Clawson and company's assertions

notwithstanding.

My recommendation is that, unless a closer unit becomes available, you

continue to the call to which you are assigned while giving dispatch as much

information as possible about the new call. I say this because I have many

times

been dispatched for a " routine sick call " only to find the patient in full

arrest on arrival.

So who is your duty to? The patient who has been told that the ambulance is

on the way.

Gene G.

> I thought this issue was pretty well settled twenty years ago when

> it was widely addressed nationwide at EMS conferences by the legal

> eagles, and most agencies adopted policies addressing it.  However,

> recently I am hearing much disagreement over an old issue.  Having

> been inactive for a few years, I'd like to hear the current

> operational consensus on the following scenario:

>

> You are dispatched to a medical emergency.  Enroute, you roll up on

> an MVA where people are waving you down.  Or else you witness the

> accident.  Or you may even be involved.  Either way, do you:

>

> A. Stop at the accident and have another unit sent to the original

> patient.

>

> B. Proceed to the original patient and call for other units to

> respond to the accident.

>

> C. Let the dispatcher decide for you.

>

> D. Other - Please specify.

>

> I would like to know the opinions of the legal experts here.  And I

> would like to hear what the WRITTEN POLICIES are of other agencies. 

> And, if there are any articles or legal references applicable to the

> issue available, I would appreciate links or sources.

>

> Thanks,

>

> Rob

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

Let's review the elements of negligence. First, there must be a duty to

act. Second, a breach of that duty. Third the breach must be the proximate

cause of an injury. Fourth, the injury must be capable of estimation in

damages.

Let's look at your scenario.

Once dispatched, you have a duty to the patient to respond to that call.

You are committed to that patient, as is the system.

Now, if you encounter another emergency on the way, your actions depend

entirely upon the capacity of your service to handle multiple calls.

Normally, you would continue to your assigned call, but you would call your

dispatch and ask them to send units to the new emergency.

If you are involved, then you notify dispatch and another truck will be

dispatched to your call.

If you have multiple trucks available, dispatch may send another truck to

cover your call if it can either get there in the same time as you would or beat

you. This happens all the time in large systems where one truck enroute is

disregarded because a closer unit becomes available.

However, if the second truck is going to be late getting there, that may

cause a problem.

So it's all about duty, and the right of a patient who is relying upon your

service to respond to receive a timely response.

In some systems they may attempt to telephone triage the calls and either

upgrade or downgrade based upon balancing priorities. Bad. VERY BAD.

Telephone triage seldom gets it right, Dr. Clawson and company's assertions

notwithstanding.

My recommendation is that, unless a closer unit becomes available, you

continue to the call to which you are assigned while giving dispatch as much

information as possible about the new call. I say this because I have many

times

been dispatched for a " routine sick call " only to find the patient in full

arrest on arrival.

So who is your duty to? The patient who has been told that the ambulance is

on the way.

Gene G.

> I thought this issue was pretty well settled twenty years ago when

> it was widely addressed nationwide at EMS conferences by the legal

> eagles, and most agencies adopted policies addressing it.  However,

> recently I am hearing much disagreement over an old issue.  Having

> been inactive for a few years, I'd like to hear the current

> operational consensus on the following scenario:

>

> You are dispatched to a medical emergency.  Enroute, you roll up on

> an MVA where people are waving you down.  Or else you witness the

> accident.  Or you may even be involved.  Either way, do you:

>

> A. Stop at the accident and have another unit sent to the original

> patient.

>

> B. Proceed to the original patient and call for other units to

> respond to the accident.

>

> C. Let the dispatcher decide for you.

>

> D. Other - Please specify.

>

> I would like to know the opinions of the legal experts here.  And I

> would like to hear what the WRITTEN POLICIES are of other agencies. 

> And, if there are any articles or legal references applicable to the

> issue available, I would appreciate links or sources.

>

> Thanks,

>

> Rob

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

Perhaps the most misunderstood traffic law in the world is the " failure to

stop and render aid " statute.

This statute only applies to those who are involved in the accident. It has

no application whatsoever to a passerby.

Therefore, a passerby has no duty to do anything. There are, I think, two

states, Vermont and Wisconsin, that have statutes that require the passerby to

take reasonable steps to notify authorities of the situation, but that's about

as far as they go.

> Even though you did not initially receive the call would you still not be

> subject to failure to render aid?  

>   

>   Not to mention what other complications could be started.   " I saw this

> ambulance and they just drove right by and we had to wait for about 10 more

> minutes before another ambulance arrived. "

>

Well, so what? That's a public relations problem, not a legal problem.

The law is very, very clear that your duty is to the patient you're dispatched

for.

>   

>   You have not yet made patient contact with the other subject your intitial

> call was for.  You would make patient contact on this scene sooner.

>

That's totally beside the point. Duty has an element of reliance. The

person calling for emergency

help, who is told that an ambulance is enroute, has a legal right to rely on

the representation that an ambulance is coming within a reasonable time.

There are many, many cases on this subject, and the ambulance company ALWAYS

LOSES if they divert and the original patient suffers.

As I said in another post, the only time you can divert is if another truck

becomes available that can reach your patient as soon or sooner than you could.

Under those circumstances, you might be reassigned, but unless that's the

case, you're duty bound to serve your first patient. It's first come, first

served.

Gene

>

> james davis wrote:

>   this is three different questions:

> 1) did you just get waved down

> 2) did you witness the MVA

> 3) were you involved

>

> jim davis

>

> dustdevil31 wrote: I thought this issue was pretty well settled twenty years

> ago when

> it was widely addressed nationwide at EMS conferences by the legal

> eagles, and most agencies adopted policies addressing it. However,

> recently I am hearing much disagreement over an old issue. Having

> been inactive for a few years, I'd like to hear the current

> operational consensus on the following scenario:

>

> You are dispatched to a medical emergency. Enroute, you roll up on

> an MVA where people are waving you down. Or else you witness the

> accident. Or you may even be involved. Either way, do you:

>

> A. Stop at the accident and have another unit sent to the original

> patient.

>

> B. Proceed to the original patient and call for other units to

> respond to the accident.

>

> C. Let the dispatcher decide for you.

>

> D. Other - Please specify.

>

> I would like to know the opinions of the legal experts here. And I

> would like to hear what the WRITTEN POLICIES are of other agencies.

> And, if there are any articles or legal references applicable to the

> issue available, I would appreciate links or sources.

>

> Thanks,

>

> Rob

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

Perhaps the most misunderstood traffic law in the world is the " failure to

stop and render aid " statute.

This statute only applies to those who are involved in the accident. It has

no application whatsoever to a passerby.

Therefore, a passerby has no duty to do anything. There are, I think, two

states, Vermont and Wisconsin, that have statutes that require the passerby to

take reasonable steps to notify authorities of the situation, but that's about

as far as they go.

> Even though you did not initially receive the call would you still not be

> subject to failure to render aid?  

>   

>   Not to mention what other complications could be started.   " I saw this

> ambulance and they just drove right by and we had to wait for about 10 more

> minutes before another ambulance arrived. "

>

Well, so what? That's a public relations problem, not a legal problem.

The law is very, very clear that your duty is to the patient you're dispatched

for.

>   

>   You have not yet made patient contact with the other subject your intitial

> call was for.  You would make patient contact on this scene sooner.

>

That's totally beside the point. Duty has an element of reliance. The

person calling for emergency

help, who is told that an ambulance is enroute, has a legal right to rely on

the representation that an ambulance is coming within a reasonable time.

There are many, many cases on this subject, and the ambulance company ALWAYS

LOSES if they divert and the original patient suffers.

As I said in another post, the only time you can divert is if another truck

becomes available that can reach your patient as soon or sooner than you could.

Under those circumstances, you might be reassigned, but unless that's the

case, you're duty bound to serve your first patient. It's first come, first

served.

Gene

>

> james davis wrote:

>   this is three different questions:

> 1) did you just get waved down

> 2) did you witness the MVA

> 3) were you involved

>

> jim davis

>

> dustdevil31 wrote: I thought this issue was pretty well settled twenty years

> ago when

> it was widely addressed nationwide at EMS conferences by the legal

> eagles, and most agencies adopted policies addressing it. However,

> recently I am hearing much disagreement over an old issue. Having

> been inactive for a few years, I'd like to hear the current

> operational consensus on the following scenario:

>

> You are dispatched to a medical emergency. Enroute, you roll up on

> an MVA where people are waving you down. Or else you witness the

> accident. Or you may even be involved. Either way, do you:

>

> A. Stop at the accident and have another unit sent to the original

> patient.

>

> B. Proceed to the original patient and call for other units to

> respond to the accident.

>

> C. Let the dispatcher decide for you.

>

> D. Other - Please specify.

>

> I would like to know the opinions of the legal experts here. And I

> would like to hear what the WRITTEN POLICIES are of other agencies.

> And, if there are any articles or legal references applicable to the

> issue available, I would appreciate links or sources.

>

> Thanks,

>

> Rob

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

Perhaps the most misunderstood traffic law in the world is the " failure to

stop and render aid " statute.

This statute only applies to those who are involved in the accident. It has

no application whatsoever to a passerby.

Therefore, a passerby has no duty to do anything. There are, I think, two

states, Vermont and Wisconsin, that have statutes that require the passerby to

take reasonable steps to notify authorities of the situation, but that's about

as far as they go.

> Even though you did not initially receive the call would you still not be

> subject to failure to render aid?  

>   

>   Not to mention what other complications could be started.   " I saw this

> ambulance and they just drove right by and we had to wait for about 10 more

> minutes before another ambulance arrived. "

>

Well, so what? That's a public relations problem, not a legal problem.

The law is very, very clear that your duty is to the patient you're dispatched

for.

>   

>   You have not yet made patient contact with the other subject your intitial

> call was for.  You would make patient contact on this scene sooner.

>

That's totally beside the point. Duty has an element of reliance. The

person calling for emergency

help, who is told that an ambulance is enroute, has a legal right to rely on

the representation that an ambulance is coming within a reasonable time.

There are many, many cases on this subject, and the ambulance company ALWAYS

LOSES if they divert and the original patient suffers.

As I said in another post, the only time you can divert is if another truck

becomes available that can reach your patient as soon or sooner than you could.

Under those circumstances, you might be reassigned, but unless that's the

case, you're duty bound to serve your first patient. It's first come, first

served.

Gene

>

> james davis wrote:

>   this is three different questions:

> 1) did you just get waved down

> 2) did you witness the MVA

> 3) were you involved

>

> jim davis

>

> dustdevil31 wrote: I thought this issue was pretty well settled twenty years

> ago when

> it was widely addressed nationwide at EMS conferences by the legal

> eagles, and most agencies adopted policies addressing it. However,

> recently I am hearing much disagreement over an old issue. Having

> been inactive for a few years, I'd like to hear the current

> operational consensus on the following scenario:

>

> You are dispatched to a medical emergency. Enroute, you roll up on

> an MVA where people are waving you down. Or else you witness the

> accident. Or you may even be involved. Either way, do you:

>

> A. Stop at the accident and have another unit sent to the original

> patient.

>

> B. Proceed to the original patient and call for other units to

> respond to the accident.

>

> C. Let the dispatcher decide for you.

>

> D. Other - Please specify.

>

> I would like to know the opinions of the legal experts here. And I

> would like to hear what the WRITTEN POLICIES are of other agencies.

> And, if there are any articles or legal references applicable to the

> issue available, I would appreciate links or sources.

>

> Thanks,

>

> Rob

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

Unless our unit is involved in the accident, we continue on to the call we have

been dispatched to and request other units to respond to the one we saw/came

upon. We have a duty to act to the person who summoned us for help.

Dudley

Medico-Legal Operational Question

I thought this issue was pretty well settled twenty years ago when

it was widely addressed nationwide at EMS conferences by the legal

eagles, and most agencies adopted policies addressing it. However,

recently I am hearing much disagreement over an old issue. Having

been inactive for a few years, I'd like to hear the current

operational consensus on the following scenario:

You are dispatched to a medical emergency. Enroute, you roll up on

an MVA where people are waving you down. Or else you witness the

accident. Or you may even be involved. Either way, do you:

A. Stop at the accident and have another unit sent to the original

patient.

B. Proceed to the original patient and call for other units to

respond to the accident.

C. Let the dispatcher decide for you.

D. Other - Please specify.

I would like to know the opinions of the legal experts here. And I

would like to hear what the WRITTEN POLICIES are of other agencies.

And, if there are any articles or legal references applicable to the

issue available, I would appreciate links or sources.

Thanks,

Rob

[Guest guest]

Unless our unit is involved in the accident, we continue on to the call we have

been dispatched to and request other units to respond to the one we saw/came

upon. We have a duty to act to the person who summoned us for help.

Dudley

Medico-Legal Operational Question

I thought this issue was pretty well settled twenty years ago when

it was widely addressed nationwide at EMS conferences by the legal

eagles, and most agencies adopted policies addressing it. However,

recently I am hearing much disagreement over an old issue. Having

been inactive for a few years, I'd like to hear the current

operational consensus on the following scenario:

You are dispatched to a medical emergency. Enroute, you roll up on

an MVA where people are waving you down. Or else you witness the

accident. Or you may even be involved. Either way, do you:

A. Stop at the accident and have another unit sent to the original

patient.

B. Proceed to the original patient and call for other units to

respond to the accident.

C. Let the dispatcher decide for you.

D. Other - Please specify.

I would like to know the opinions of the legal experts here. And I

would like to hear what the WRITTEN POLICIES are of other agencies.

And, if there are any articles or legal references applicable to the

issue available, I would appreciate links or sources.

Thanks,

Rob

[Guest guest]

Unless our unit is involved in the accident, we continue on to the call we have

been dispatched to and request other units to respond to the one we saw/came

upon. We have a duty to act to the person who summoned us for help.

Dudley

Medico-Legal Operational Question

I thought this issue was pretty well settled twenty years ago when

it was widely addressed nationwide at EMS conferences by the legal

eagles, and most agencies adopted policies addressing it. However,

recently I am hearing much disagreement over an old issue. Having

been inactive for a few years, I'd like to hear the current

operational consensus on the following scenario:

You are dispatched to a medical emergency. Enroute, you roll up on

an MVA where people are waving you down. Or else you witness the

accident. Or you may even be involved. Either way, do you:

A. Stop at the accident and have another unit sent to the original

patient.

B. Proceed to the original patient and call for other units to

respond to the accident.

C. Let the dispatcher decide for you.

D. Other - Please specify.

I would like to know the opinions of the legal experts here. And I

would like to hear what the WRITTEN POLICIES are of other agencies.

And, if there are any articles or legal references applicable to the

issue available, I would appreciate links or sources.

Thanks,

Rob

[Guest guest]

Of course if the unit is invlved you have no choice

but to stay and send another unit to the original

call. If you come up on it and no one is seriously

hurt, i.e., a major accident, then call for another

unit to respond to that scene and advise the people on

scene that you have another unit enroute. I recently

witnessed one and asked for another unit to respond.

I have even stopped while on a transfer with a pt on

board because the 911 provider here sometimes takes a

while to respond.

Salvador Capuchino Jr

EMT-Paramedic/Volunteer FF

--- dustdevil31 wrote:

> I thought this issue was pretty well settled twenty

> years ago when

> it was widely addressed nationwide at EMS

> conferences by the legal

> eagles, and most agencies adopted policies

> addressing it. However,

> recently I am hearing much disagreement over an old

> issue. Having

> been inactive for a few years, I'd like to hear the

> current

> operational consensus on the following scenario:

>

> You are dispatched to a medical emergency. Enroute,

> you roll up on

> an MVA where people are waving you down. Or else

> you witness the

> accident. Or you may even be involved. Either way,

> do you:

>

> A. Stop at the accident and have another unit sent

> to the original

> patient.

>

> B. Proceed to the original patient and call for

> other units to

> respond to the accident.

>

> C. Let the dispatcher decide for you.

>

> D. Other - Please specify.

>

> I would like to know the opinions of the legal

> experts here. And I

> would like to hear what the WRITTEN POLICIES are of

> other agencies.

> And, if there are any articles or legal references

> applicable to the

> issue available, I would appreciate links or

> sources.

>

> Thanks,

>

> Rob

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

this is three different questions:

1) did you just get waved down

2) did you witness the MVA

3) were you involved

jim davis

dustdevil31 wrote: I thought this issue was pretty

well settled twenty years ago when

it was widely addressed nationwide at EMS conferences by the legal

eagles, and most agencies adopted policies addressing it. However,

recently I am hearing much disagreement over an old issue. Having

been inactive for a few years, I'd like to hear the current

operational consensus on the following scenario:

You are dispatched to a medical emergency. Enroute, you roll up on

an MVA where people are waving you down. Or else you witness the

accident. Or you may even be involved. Either way, do you:

A. Stop at the accident and have another unit sent to the original

patient.

B. Proceed to the original patient and call for other units to

respond to the accident.

C. Let the dispatcher decide for you.

D. Other - Please specify.

I would like to know the opinions of the legal experts here. And I

would like to hear what the WRITTEN POLICIES are of other agencies.

And, if there are any articles or legal references applicable to the

issue available, I would appreciate links or sources.

Thanks,

Rob

[Guest guest]

this is three different questions:

1) did you just get waved down

2) did you witness the MVA

3) were you involved

jim davis

dustdevil31 wrote: I thought this issue was pretty

well settled twenty years ago when

it was widely addressed nationwide at EMS conferences by the legal

eagles, and most agencies adopted policies addressing it. However,

recently I am hearing much disagreement over an old issue. Having

been inactive for a few years, I'd like to hear the current

operational consensus on the following scenario:

You are dispatched to a medical emergency. Enroute, you roll up on

an MVA where people are waving you down. Or else you witness the

accident. Or you may even be involved. Either way, do you:

A. Stop at the accident and have another unit sent to the original

patient.

B. Proceed to the original patient and call for other units to

respond to the accident.

C. Let the dispatcher decide for you.

D. Other - Please specify.

I would like to know the opinions of the legal experts here. And I

would like to hear what the WRITTEN POLICIES are of other agencies.

And, if there are any articles or legal references applicable to the

issue available, I would appreciate links or sources.

Thanks,

Rob

[Guest guest]

Even though you did not initially receive the call would you still not be

subject to failure to render aid?

Not to mention what other complications could be started. " I saw this

ambulance and they just drove right by and we had to wait for about 10 more

minutes before another ambulance arrived. "

You have not yet made patient contact with the other subject your intitial

call was for. You would make patient contact on this scene sooner.

james davis wrote:

this is three different questions:

1) did you just get waved down

2) did you witness the MVA

3) were you involved

jim davis

dustdevil31 wrote: I thought this issue was pretty well settled twenty years ago

when

it was widely addressed nationwide at EMS conferences by the legal

eagles, and most agencies adopted policies addressing it. However,

recently I am hearing much disagreement over an old issue. Having

been inactive for a few years, I'd like to hear the current

operational consensus on the following scenario:

You are dispatched to a medical emergency. Enroute, you roll up on

an MVA where people are waving you down. Or else you witness the

accident. Or you may even be involved. Either way, do you:

A. Stop at the accident and have another unit sent to the original

patient.

B. Proceed to the original patient and call for other units to

respond to the accident.

C. Let the dispatcher decide for you.

D. Other - Please specify.

I would like to know the opinions of the legal experts here. And I

would like to hear what the WRITTEN POLICIES are of other agencies.

And, if there are any articles or legal references applicable to the

issue available, I would appreciate links or sources.

Thanks,

Rob

[Guest guest]

Even though you did not initially receive the call would you still not be

subject to failure to render aid?

Not to mention what other complications could be started. " I saw this

ambulance and they just drove right by and we had to wait for about 10 more

minutes before another ambulance arrived. "

You have not yet made patient contact with the other subject your intitial

call was for. You would make patient contact on this scene sooner.

james davis wrote:

this is three different questions:

1) did you just get waved down

2) did you witness the MVA

3) were you involved

jim davis

dustdevil31 wrote: I thought this issue was pretty well settled twenty years ago

when

it was widely addressed nationwide at EMS conferences by the legal

eagles, and most agencies adopted policies addressing it. However,

recently I am hearing much disagreement over an old issue. Having

been inactive for a few years, I'd like to hear the current

operational consensus on the following scenario:

You are dispatched to a medical emergency. Enroute, you roll up on

an MVA where people are waving you down. Or else you witness the

accident. Or you may even be involved. Either way, do you:

A. Stop at the accident and have another unit sent to the original

patient.

B. Proceed to the original patient and call for other units to

respond to the accident.

C. Let the dispatcher decide for you.

D. Other - Please specify.

I would like to know the opinions of the legal experts here. And I

would like to hear what the WRITTEN POLICIES are of other agencies.

And, if there are any articles or legal references applicable to the

issue available, I would appreciate links or sources.

Thanks,

Rob

[Guest guest]

Even though you did not initially receive the call would you still not be

subject to failure to render aid?

Not to mention what other complications could be started. " I saw this

ambulance and they just drove right by and we had to wait for about 10 more

minutes before another ambulance arrived. "

You have not yet made patient contact with the other subject your intitial

call was for. You would make patient contact on this scene sooner.

james davis wrote:

this is three different questions:

1) did you just get waved down

2) did you witness the MVA

3) were you involved

jim davis

dustdevil31 wrote: I thought this issue was pretty well settled twenty years ago

when

it was widely addressed nationwide at EMS conferences by the legal

eagles, and most agencies adopted policies addressing it. However,

recently I am hearing much disagreement over an old issue. Having

been inactive for a few years, I'd like to hear the current

operational consensus on the following scenario:

You are dispatched to a medical emergency. Enroute, you roll up on

an MVA where people are waving you down. Or else you witness the

accident. Or you may even be involved. Either way, do you:

A. Stop at the accident and have another unit sent to the original

patient.

B. Proceed to the original patient and call for other units to

respond to the accident.

C. Let the dispatcher decide for you.

D. Other - Please specify.

I would like to know the opinions of the legal experts here. And I

would like to hear what the WRITTEN POLICIES are of other agencies.

And, if there are any articles or legal references applicable to the

issue available, I would appreciate links or sources.

Thanks,

Rob

[Guest guest]

james davis wrote:

>

> this is three different questions:

> 1) did you just get waved down

> 2) did you witness the MVA

> 3) were you involved

Correct. And I suppose I poorly worded it in the interest of brevity,

but I was looking for answers to address all three potential scenarios.

Thanks,

Rob

[Guest guest]

james davis wrote:

>

> this is three different questions:

> 1) did you just get waved down

> 2) did you witness the MVA

> 3) were you involved

Correct. And I suppose I poorly worded it in the interest of brevity,

but I was looking for answers to address all three potential scenarios.

Thanks,

Rob

[Guest guest]

james davis wrote:

>

> this is three different questions:

> 1) did you just get waved down

> 2) did you witness the MVA

> 3) were you involved

Correct. And I suppose I poorly worded it in the interest of brevity,

but I was looking for answers to address all three potential scenarios.

Thanks,

Rob

[Guest guest]

In a message dated 23-Feb-06 23:36:16 Central Standard Time,

petsardlj@... writes:

Even though you did not initially receive the call would you still not be

subject to failure to render aid?

Not to mention what other complications could be started. " I saw this

ambulance and they just drove right by and we had to wait for about 10 more

minutes before another ambulance arrived. "

You have not yet made patient contact with the other subject your intitial

call was for. You would make patient contact on this scene sooner.

the answer to that one is " it depends " ...if you are already on a hot cardiac

call (say from a patient who is known to have serious cardiac disease and

frequent admissions for Acute (non operable) Coronary Syndrome), and you delay

for a 'fender bender' with no transportable injuries that you were NOT

involved in....don't you think that the first patient's family is going to have

a

good chance of successful suit?

My basic answer would be that if everyone was already noted to be 'walking

wounded' at worst (everyone out of the cars and moving around by themselves

already), then a quick visual triage and reassurance that the police and

another ambulance was on the way would be sufficient. IF your local protocols

state

otherwise, or IF there is another unit that can respond to the first case in

a more timely fashion than they can get to the scene of the MVC, THEN you

need to stay for a more complete evaluation, ELSE you have an obligation to the

first call that began when the call taker picked up the phone.

This is something that should be addressed in the Standard Operating

Guidelines for an outfit that does 911 response calls.

S. Krin, DO FAAFP

[Guest guest]

In a message dated 23-Feb-06 23:36:16 Central Standard Time,

petsardlj@... writes:

Even though you did not initially receive the call would you still not be

subject to failure to render aid?

Not to mention what other complications could be started. " I saw this

ambulance and they just drove right by and we had to wait for about 10 more

minutes before another ambulance arrived. "

You have not yet made patient contact with the other subject your intitial

call was for. You would make patient contact on this scene sooner.

the answer to that one is " it depends " ...if you are already on a hot cardiac

call (say from a patient who is known to have serious cardiac disease and

frequent admissions for Acute (non operable) Coronary Syndrome), and you delay

for a 'fender bender' with no transportable injuries that you were NOT

involved in....don't you think that the first patient's family is going to have

a

good chance of successful suit?

My basic answer would be that if everyone was already noted to be 'walking

wounded' at worst (everyone out of the cars and moving around by themselves

already), then a quick visual triage and reassurance that the police and

another ambulance was on the way would be sufficient. IF your local protocols

state

otherwise, or IF there is another unit that can respond to the first case in

a more timely fashion than they can get to the scene of the MVC, THEN you

need to stay for a more complete evaluation, ELSE you have an obligation to the

first call that began when the call taker picked up the phone.

This is something that should be addressed in the Standard Operating

Guidelines for an outfit that does 911 response calls.

S. Krin, DO FAAFP

[Guest guest]

In a message dated 23-Feb-06 23:36:16 Central Standard Time,

petsardlj@... writes:

Even though you did not initially receive the call would you still not be

subject to failure to render aid?

Not to mention what other complications could be started. " I saw this

ambulance and they just drove right by and we had to wait for about 10 more

minutes before another ambulance arrived. "

You have not yet made patient contact with the other subject your intitial

call was for. You would make patient contact on this scene sooner.

the answer to that one is " it depends " ...if you are already on a hot cardiac

call (say from a patient who is known to have serious cardiac disease and

frequent admissions for Acute (non operable) Coronary Syndrome), and you delay

for a 'fender bender' with no transportable injuries that you were NOT

involved in....don't you think that the first patient's family is going to have

a

good chance of successful suit?

My basic answer would be that if everyone was already noted to be 'walking

wounded' at worst (everyone out of the cars and moving around by themselves

already), then a quick visual triage and reassurance that the police and

another ambulance was on the way would be sufficient. IF your local protocols

state

otherwise, or IF there is another unit that can respond to the first case in

a more timely fashion than they can get to the scene of the MVC, THEN you

need to stay for a more complete evaluation, ELSE you have an obligation to the

first call that began when the call taker picked up the phone.

This is something that should be addressed in the Standard Operating

Guidelines for an outfit that does 911 response calls.

S. Krin, DO FAAFP

[Guest guest]

In a message dated 23-Feb-06 23:41:17 Central Standard Time,

wegandy1938@... writes:

My recommendation is that, unless a closer unit becomes available, you

continue to the call to which you are assigned while giving dispatch as much

information as possible about the new call. I say this because I have many

times

been dispatched for a " routine sick call " only to find the patient in full

arrest on arrival.

Damn, Gene, sounds like you've worked some of the Louisiana Nursery Homes

that I am familiar with...they hate to have to call the coroner, even if the

patient is on Hospice and has both a DNR and appropriate Living Will on file.

The flip side of that is the number of calls where the 'nurse' reports the

patient to be in extremitis, 'fixin' to die'....only to have the very awake,

smiling, very demented, patient be chatting with the medics on the way into

the hospital....

S. Krin, DO FAAFP

[Guest guest]

In a message dated 23-Feb-06 23:41:17 Central Standard Time,

wegandy1938@... writes:

My recommendation is that, unless a closer unit becomes available, you

continue to the call to which you are assigned while giving dispatch as much

information as possible about the new call. I say this because I have many

times

been dispatched for a " routine sick call " only to find the patient in full

arrest on arrival.

Damn, Gene, sounds like you've worked some of the Louisiana Nursery Homes

that I am familiar with...they hate to have to call the coroner, even if the

patient is on Hospice and has both a DNR and appropriate Living Will on file.

The flip side of that is the number of calls where the 'nurse' reports the

patient to be in extremitis, 'fixin' to die'....only to have the very awake,

smiling, very demented, patient be chatting with the medics on the way into

the hospital....

S. Krin, DO FAAFP

[Guest guest]

In a message dated 23-Feb-06 23:41:17 Central Standard Time,

wegandy1938@... writes:

My recommendation is that, unless a closer unit becomes available, you

continue to the call to which you are assigned while giving dispatch as much

information as possible about the new call. I say this because I have many

times

been dispatched for a " routine sick call " only to find the patient in full

arrest on arrival.

Damn, Gene, sounds like you've worked some of the Louisiana Nursery Homes

that I am familiar with...they hate to have to call the coroner, even if the

patient is on Hospice and has both a DNR and appropriate Living Will on file.

The flip side of that is the number of calls where the 'nurse' reports the

patient to be in extremitis, 'fixin' to die'....only to have the very awake,

smiling, very demented, patient be chatting with the medics on the way into

the hospital....

S. Krin, DO FAAFP

[Guest guest]

My favorite Nursery Home story involves a call I received one day just as we

went back in service after another call. Dispatch said, " Respond to

Graveside Manor on a cardiac arrest. "

We were 20 miles away, but we responded because there wasn't anybody else

closer. On arrival, we found the patient in bed, sitting up, watching TV.

Somewhat puzzled, we asked the " nurse " what had happened.

" Well, " said nursey, " She had a SMALL cardiac arrest. " My pard and I looked

at each other and began to try to stifle giggles. " We were feeding her

breakfast, " nurse went on, " when she 'went out' so we gave her some scrambled

eggs and she came back. "

At this point I had to leave the room. I would have rolled in the floor

laughing except that this was, of course a nursing home, and walking on the

floor

was bad enough.

After that, we puzzled our medical director by asking for a hot plate and

some eggs for the truck so that we could perform the scrambled eggs treatment

for

SMALL cardiac arrests.

GG

>

> In a message dated 23-Feb-06 23:41:17 Central Standard Time, 

> wegandy1938@... writes:

>

> My  recommendation is that, unless a closer unit becomes available, you 

> continue to the call to which you are assigned while giving dispatch as 

> much

> information as possible about the new call.   I say this  because I have

> many

> times

> been dispatched for a " routine sick call " only  to find the patient in full

> arrest on arrival.

>

>

> Damn, Gene, sounds like you've worked some of the Louisiana  Nursery Homes

> that I am familiar with...they hate to have to call the coroner,  even if

> the

> patient is on Hospice and has both a DNR and appropriate Living Will  on

> file.

>

> The flip side of that is the number of calls where the 'nurse'  reports the

> patient to be in extremitis, 'fixin' to die'....only to have the  very

> awake,

> smiling, very demented, patient be chatting with the medics on the  way into

> the hospital....

>

> S. Krin, DO  FAAFP

>

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

Per TDSHS you would not be violating any laws so you

would be clear by them. The thing is the legal

aspect, i.e. civil suit. And it also depends on your

company SOP.

Salvador Capuchino Jr

EMT-Paramedic

--- Danny wrote:

> Even though you did not initially receive the call

> would you still not be subject to failure to render

> aid?

>

> Not to mention what other complications could be

> started. " I saw this ambulance and they just drove

> right by and we had to wait for about 10 more

> minutes before another ambulance arrived. "

>

> You have not yet made patient contact with the

> other subject your intitial call was for. You would

> make patient contact on this scene sooner.

>

> james davis wrote:

> this is three different questions:

> 1) did you just get waved down

> 2) did you witness the MVA

> 3) were you involved

>

> jim davis

>

> dustdevil31 wrote: I thought this issue was pretty

> well settled twenty years ago when

> it was widely addressed nationwide at EMS

> conferences by the legal

> eagles, and most agencies adopted policies

> addressing it. However,

> recently I am hearing much disagreement over an old

> issue. Having

> been inactive for a few years, I'd like to hear the

> current

> operational consensus on the following scenario:

>

> You are dispatched to a medical emergency. Enroute,

> you roll up on

> an MVA where people are waving you down. Or else you

> witness the

> accident. Or you may even be involved. Either way,

> do you:

>

> A. Stop at the accident and have another unit sent

> to the original

> patient.

>

> B. Proceed to the original patient and call for

> other units to

> respond to the accident.

>

> C. Let the dispatcher decide for you.

>

> D. Other - Please specify.

>

> I would like to know the opinions of the legal

> experts here. And I

> would like to hear what the WRITTEN POLICIES are of

> other agencies.

> And, if there are any articles or legal references

> applicable to the

> issue available, I would appreciate links or

> sources.

>

> Thanks,

>

> Rob

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>