Guest guest Posted February 23, 2006 Report Share Posted February 23, 2006 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 > > > > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 23, 2006 Report Share Posted February 23, 2006 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 > > > > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 23, 2006 Report Share Posted February 23, 2006 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 > > > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 23, 2006 Report Share Posted February 23, 2006 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 > > > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 23, 2006 Report Share Posted February 23, 2006 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 > > > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 23, 2006 Report Share Posted February 23, 2006 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 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 23, 2006 Report Share Posted February 23, 2006 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 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 23, 2006 Report Share Posted February 23, 2006 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 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 23, 2006 Report Share Posted February 23, 2006 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 > > > > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 23, 2006 Report Share Posted February 23, 2006 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 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 23, 2006 Report Share Posted February 23, 2006 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 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 23, 2006 Report Share Posted February 23, 2006 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 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 23, 2006 Report Share Posted February 23, 2006 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 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 23, 2006 Report Share Posted February 23, 2006 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 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 23, 2006 Report Share Posted February 23, 2006 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 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 23, 2006 Report Share Posted February 23, 2006 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 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 23, 2006 Report Share Posted February 23, 2006 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 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 24, 2006 Report Share Posted February 24, 2006 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 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 24, 2006 Report Share Posted February 24, 2006 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 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 24, 2006 Report Share Posted February 24, 2006 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 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 24, 2006 Report Share Posted February 24, 2006 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 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 24, 2006 Report Share Posted February 24, 2006 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 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 24, 2006 Report Share Posted February 24, 2006 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 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 24, 2006 Report Share Posted February 24, 2006 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 > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 24, 2006 Report Share Posted February 24, 2006 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 > > > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.