Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site mb2c.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!gamma!epsilon!mb2c!mpr
From: mpr@mb2c.UUCP (Mark Reina)
Newsgroups: net.legal
Subject: Re: CPR, First Aid, & Liability
Message-ID: <464@mb2c.UUCP>
Date: Thu, 6-Feb-86 07:43:56 EST
Article-I.D.: mb2c.464
Posted: Thu Feb  6 07:43:56 1986
Date-Received: Fri, 7-Feb-86 21:45:36 EST
References: <2495@gatech.CSNET> <7700001@ccvaxa> <764@ihu1g.UUCP>
Organization: Michigan Bell, Southfield, MI
Lines: 25

> > Damn the torpedoes!
> > This becomes a moral question as well as a legal one.
> > If you come upon someone injured, know (or think you know) what the
> > appropriate first aid is, but are not trained in it:
> > seek trained help. If there is no trained help, and it does not
> > appear that the subject will survive long enough to get to trained
> > help, I would help to the best of my knowledge nontheless.
> > Damn the legal consequences - all they can take is my money.
> 
> The U.S. Congress had considered this dilemma a number of years ago, and
> passed what has been known as the "Good Samaritan Act."  I don't know
> all the details, but it is a law which limits the liabilities of persons,
> including doctors, who stop to render emergency aid in life-threatening
> situations.  The law was needed because many doctors were refusing to
> render emergency aid in such situations, fearing malpractice suits.
> /  \
> \__/			Bob Fishell
> 			ihnp4!ihu1g!fish

I don't see what this problem has to do with the U.S. Congress.  This type
of liability is usually covered under state laws (unless the "good samaritan"
is in the armed forces). Bob Fishell, are you sure of your facts?
What is the USCA citation?

			   Mark Reina