Originally Posted By: JohnE
Sounds like someone was looking out for the company's interest. Look at it from their point of view, 2 employees treated and transported a patient that didn't need to be. On company time.

You set your company up for a lawsuit if things had gone wrong.

It's always nice to help other people out but if the patient needed to be transported then you should have called for an ambulance. You treated and transported someone in a private vehicle against her expressed wishes, you could have been charged with a crime. Who's going to pay her hospital bill? Who would the patient blame if she'd been further injured due to you getting involved? Simple answer, whoever's got more money, you or the company.
From the OP:
Originally Posted By: Desperado
. . .I immobilized the leg with a SAM splint and transported her to the local ER. (She didn’t want the ambulance ride, and really didn’t need it.). . .
As I read the OP's quote, it seems the patient didn't want an ambulance ride; it didn't say she didn't want to be transported someone in a private vehicle against her expressed wishes.

Sounds to me like everything worked well. Fortunately, Texas isn't in Southern California.
_________________________
Better is the Enemy of Good Enough.
Okay, what’s your point??