MartinC
Trainee tea boy
Zanash - much as I'd rather not given your experience, which I respect greatly, I'm afraid I'm going to have to say I'm still not convinced you are correct. The criteria I believe has very much got to be one of doing what is appropriate* rather than having the best intentions. Were for example a first aider to attempt a surgical cricothyroidotomy (on even a patient where this is indicated) using a pen knife and a biro casing, they would I believe be on somewhat dubious ground if a legal case were to be brought against them.zanash said:Martin C.....as stated I served for 20years and along with the rest of the crews provided first aid on a daily basis. Your premise is in correct...the overriding factor in law was the first responder "has the best intentions" not my quote. This is from our training notes regarding litigation. There has all ready been a case in law which has set the precident, to which other case are compared. It nowhere does it state " to the limit of your training" if that was the case no first aid could ever be given.
I am very open to be corrected on this, and am going to have to do a spot of investigating, but I do not think the legal precedant raised above would apply to such a case. If you know any more details I would be very interested. This is a question I really ought to know the answer to and so am keen to get to the bottom of.
*or perhaps what a person given their training would reasonably be expected to believe is appropriate (i.e. everyone is allowed to make mistakes).
Edit: respond in pm if you like as this is somewhat OT.