2) Any AG shall not attempt to help an emergency victim if a) They are unsure of what actually occurred in the situation at hand or b) Do not have proper training to perform any tasks that need to happen in order to help the emergency victim.
What happened is far less important than what is happening. You are not going to be able to find out what is happening unless you actually do something to help. Sure, you don't know if they are choking because they swallowed a grenade, had a giant wombat hide in their throat or are just choking on a carrot... but those are risks that you can't be aware of till you chose to help. To simplify, you ALWAYS start out unsure, unless you were right there next to them as it happened watching the entire time. Since any decent legal defense can prove the Good Samaritan was probably unsure, civil action is opened up again.
3) A AG forfeits this right if harm is caused to the emergency victim and if the emergency victim, or another other person(s) or organization(s) have viable proof that the harm was intentional.
The use of "and" and "or" in this is confusing. Should be written like this:
3) A AG forfeits this right if the following conditions are both met:
-a) harm is caused to the emergency victim
-b) if the emergency victim, or another other person(s) or organization(s) have viable proof that the harm was intentional
Any inclarities open loopholes in laws and leave them up to interpretation.
1) Any trained medical professional who arrives at the scene of an emergency by chance is confident that they can in some way help an emergency victim is required to help the emergency victim to the best of their ability until other trained personnel arrive.
FORCING a medicaly trained person to help is a definite No-no. First responders when they arrive must help because that is their job. Bystanders must not be forced to help or they might just give shoddy help just to get it over with and avvoid being sued for not helping. What if they had been drinking recently? What if they were on their way to another medical emergency at a hospital? They get sued for failing to help whomever they don't choose.
1a) Requires member states to provide basic education of certain situations and first aid to those who seek it;
1b) Allows for member states to implement mandatory basic education of certain situations and first aid training for citizens to partake in.
I am confused... the mainp point specifically says "Those who seek it" which implies this is VOLUNTARY. The sub-point specifically says "Mandatory". Not only is this contradictory, but if it is mandatory then all citizens must be trained and all must help any victims or risk being sued for not helping. Many people are not cut out to perform medical assistance in any form. They get nervous, scared, panic, vomit, etc. I for one do not wish to have any of those helping me past calling an ambulance.
So in closing , we cannot accept such legislation. We applaud the intent to protect Good Samaritans, but are appalled at the attempt to turn innocent bystanders into targets to be sued for chosing not to help or for being incapable of helping. This proposal needs to be rewritten before we can accept it in any form.
(This forum needs a smugface smiley)
