Posted by: Arney
Sued by your rescuers - 08/04/11 04:19 PM
I was just reading this article about two guys who saved a woman from a burning car, suffered injuries, and are now suing the woman. The article quotes a law professor who says that rescuers suing the "rescuee" isn't that uncommon.
I struggle with the implications of the article. On one hand, in a perfect world, we would like people to come to each other's aid and everyone lives happily ever after. Then again, bad things sometimes happen when Good Samaritans get involved, and many of us have gotten instructions during first aid or other courses to "not add another victim" to a situation by putting yourself in harms' way. The universal advice to not go into, or back into, a burning building is one example. Although I'm sick of people suing each other, I really do feel badly for these rescuers who ended up injured/disabled--injuries they wouldn't have had if they hadn't tried rescuing the woman. And these guys were suing for $25,000 each, so they're certainly not getting rich.
Have others ever considered the legal ramifications as some life threatening situation unfolded in front of them and it altered what they might have initially wanted to do to help? Professionals, like police officers or EMT's, often have to think about the legal ramifications of their actions all the time, but I'm thinking more in terms of regular folks--folks under no legal duty to act. If I don't want to risk getting hurt, or risk putting the victim into a worse condition, then the "logical" thing to do is to do nothing (ugh).
I struggle with the implications of the article. On one hand, in a perfect world, we would like people to come to each other's aid and everyone lives happily ever after. Then again, bad things sometimes happen when Good Samaritans get involved, and many of us have gotten instructions during first aid or other courses to "not add another victim" to a situation by putting yourself in harms' way. The universal advice to not go into, or back into, a burning building is one example. Although I'm sick of people suing each other, I really do feel badly for these rescuers who ended up injured/disabled--injuries they wouldn't have had if they hadn't tried rescuing the woman. And these guys were suing for $25,000 each, so they're certainly not getting rich.
Have others ever considered the legal ramifications as some life threatening situation unfolded in front of them and it altered what they might have initially wanted to do to help? Professionals, like police officers or EMT's, often have to think about the legal ramifications of their actions all the time, but I'm thinking more in terms of regular folks--folks under no legal duty to act. If I don't want to risk getting hurt, or risk putting the victim into a worse condition, then the "logical" thing to do is to do nothing (ugh).