What is happening to our society?

The friendliest place on the web for anyone with an RV or an interest in RVing!
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
Status
Not open for further replies.
I typed too quickly and wasn't very clear.
The laws prevent liability action against persons who offer medical emergency assistance and are not medical professionals (good Samaritans).
 
Unfortunately this is a growing sickness on our society, thy rather record it and post it on social media than help the person. And please, don?t blame the parents, you are the sole owner of your actions. This is like saying he is a killer because the parents are too. Please! That?s the first problem with our society, we love to blame our faults on someone else.
I think we had been blessed, we have good neighbors, but also have bad ones. We make an effort to get to know our neighbors and talk to them. We live in a fast society, long working hours and little quality time, specially if you live in a metropolitan area.
And I do agree the RV community is more sociable, he have experienced this at most campgrounds. One of the reasons we love rv?ing so much.
 
BinaryBob said:
I typed too quickly and wasn't very clear.
The laws prevent liability action against persons who offer medical emergency assistance and are not medical professionals (good Samaritans).

Bet many people don't know this, I sure didn't. Wouldn't stop me from helping, but what did is, I stopped to help people that were involved in a head on collision in 1980. Me and another guy that was trying to get the girl taken care of was on the right side of the car. I was squatting down trying to put a rag on her where she was bleeding, when the car was hit by another car. I ended up almost loosing my life, had 47 stitches to close the wound on the back of my head. The other guy lost his left eye, all because of TWO DRUNK drivers. The one that caused the first wreck and the one who hit the car the second time. I'd still help someone in trouble, but I'd never stop at another accident scene. 
 
While it has never stopped me from rendering aid, most Good Samaritan laws do not protect anyone from being sued. They probably do minimize the number of lawyers willing to take the case and may get the case thrown out once it hits the courts though. In general, Good Samaritan laws protect you from liability as long as your actions are "reasonable and prudent". Now who do you think gets to decide if your actions were "reasonable and prudent"? Yep, the judge or jury deciding the lawsuit the victim filed against you for ruining his suit when you dragged him unconscious from that burning car. Fortunately, your lawyer probably won't charge a whole lot for defending you. My lawyer only charges $250 per full or partial hr...

Here's an excerpt from Alabama's "Good Samaritan" law, the section that applies to us non-medically trained folks:

"Any person, who, in good faith, renders emergency care at the scene of an accident or emergency to the victim or victims thereof without making any charge of goods or services therefor shall not be liable for any civil damages as a result of any act or omission by the person in rendering emergency care or as a result of any act or failure to act to provide or arrange for further medical treatment or care for the injured person if the individual acts as a reasonably prudent person would have acted under the same or similar circumstances."

The balance of the law primarily applies to professionals in various fields.

https://codes.findlaw.com/al/title-6-civil-practice/al-code-sect-6-5-332.html
 
Charlie 5320 said:
Bet many people don't know this, I sure didn't. Wouldn't stop me from helping, but what did is, I stopped to help people that were involved in a head on collision in 1980. Me and another guy that was trying to get the girl taken care of was on the right side of the car. I was squatting down trying to put a rag on her where she was bleeding, when the car was hit by another car. I ended up almost loosing my life, had 47 stitches to close the wound on the back of my head. The other guy lost his left eye, all because of TWO DRUNK drivers. The one that caused the first wreck and the one who hit the car the second time. I'd still help someone in trouble, but I'd never stop at another accident scene.
Grrrrrr, my pet peeve, drunk drivers. The accident I referred to was a driver high on cocaine (NOT his first accident high on cocaine, and he was a pharmacist) and 2 of the three kids in the car he hit ended up dying.
 
It's always a tough call whether to stop and render aid. As an EMT, I'm not covered by Good Samaritan laws. I'm also not covered by my agency when not on duty. My butt's hanging out there unprotected.

The thought process is, "Is it worth losing my house and and retirement?" before stopping to help. Sadly, the answer is usually no.
 
HappyWanderer said:
It's always a tough call whether to stop and render aid. As an EMT, I'm not covered by Good Samaritan laws. I'm also not covered by my agency when not on duty. My butt's hanging out there unprotected.

The thought process is, "Is it worth losing my house and and retirement?" before stopping to help. Sadly, the answer is usually no.

I think in some ways that this is more concerning to me than the fact that "the general public" doesn't stop.  About society I mean, not HappyWanderer, or any professional directly....  I totally get what you're saying about your own butt hanging out there....

What I mean is this.  My whole thought while reading this discussion about rendering first aid was that I figure a lot of people are like me.  I have say through all sorts of first aid training classes, but have zero confidence in rendering first aid at all, past the level of taking care of my kid's scraped knee.  Anything more than that I would be just winging it, praying that a pro gets there in the next second to take over.  It's the professional that I would hope would be in a position to offer much better help....professionally trained but even more than that experienced.
...but then we put these folks into the situation that HappyWanderer describes.

on the other note of folks not stopping...and not excusing the problem....because I do believe that this general idea is a systemic problem with society....but the thing I thin of is paradigm shift.  You never know what situation those people that didn't stop are in....where they are going, etc...

A 'sortof similar' example of what I mean, Not nearly the same as the OP's example....Once a long while ago, I saw someone on the roadside broken down.  I don't remember specifics except that it was some very narrow shoulder on a busy interstate type road.... I remember feeling the urge to help...that that person could use a hand and I should give it....but I had my family in the car and there was no place at all to safely park them out of harms way....so I said a little prayer.  Tough decision.
 
Here's another situation to ponder.  This was pointed out to me in a defensive firearms class I was taking.

"You're driving down the street and you observe a woman struggling with a poorly dressed man.  She is yelling 'Help! Help! Rape!'.  You stop, pull your gun on the guy, and command him to release the woman.  She runs off.  The man produces a badge and informs you that he is an undercover police officer who was trying to arrest a prostitute."

Think that's going to end well?  I guarantee you will be going to court, and NOT to receive a medal for being a good citizen.
 
NY_Dutch said:
Do a Google search on "accident victim sues good samaritan".  You may be surprised...

This was an older lady laying on the ground.  You didn't have to be a Good Samaritan to stop and at least ask if she was okay or needed help or, if necessary, call 911.  This was not a vehicle accident or anything that represented a danger to a person stopping.  It was an indication of how people think today (or not think).  They would not even have had to get out of the car to ask if she was okay and this is not a heavy traffic area.

PS:  Amanda (RVMommyto6)  You are a great addition to this forum. Thanks to you and all others who have contributed to this thread.

Bill
 
According to the Florida Good Samaritan Act, ?any person, including those licensed to practice medicine? who willingly, and in good faith, provides emergency care or treatment to another in an emergency situation shall not be liable for any civil damages as a result of such aid or treatment.
 
Bill N said:
This was an older lady laying on the ground.  You didn't have to be a Good Samaritan to stop and at least ask if she was okay or needed help or, if necessary, call 911.  This was not a vehicle accident or anything that represented a danger to a person stopping.  It was an indication of how people think today (or not think).  They would not even have had to get out of the car to ask if she was okay and this is not a heavily traffic area.

Bill

I agree, Bill, and would likely have checked on her, but in today's litigious society, I'm not surprised no one did.
 
Dragginourbedaround said:
According to the Florida Good Samaritan Act, ?any person, including those licensed to practice medicine? who willingly, and in good faith, provides emergency care or treatment to another in an emergency situation shall not be liable for any civil damages as a result of such aid or treatment.

:)) :))
 
Dragginourbedaround said:
According to the Florida Good Samaritan Act, ?any person, including those licensed to practice medicine? who willingly, and in good faith, provides emergency care or treatment to another in an emergency situation shall not be liable for any civil damages as a result of such aid or treatment.

And the law then goes on to say: "The individual who renders help can be found liable if: 1) the helper fails to exercise due care and increases harm to the other person; or 2) the other person reasonably relied upon the helper?s undertaking and suffers an injury as a result. Essentially, someone who helps another person in an emergency situation will only be liable if they act in a manner that ultimately exacerbates the injury and/or condition rather than alleviating it." And a judge/jury gets to decide those issues in a lawsuit. Good Samaritan laws do NOT protect against lawsuits, only against being found liable in a lawsuit unless proven negligent. There can be a fine line between rendering aid that incidentally causes further injury, and rendering aid that negligently causes further injury.
 
Here is the exact wording in part of Florida's Good Samaritan Law. Pay particular attention to the last sentence:

768.13 Good Samaritan Act; immunity from civil liability.?
(1) This act shall be known and cited as the ?Good Samaritan Act.?
(2)(a) Any person, including those licensed to practice medicine, who gratuitously and in good faith renders emergency care or treatment either in direct response to emergency situations related to and arising out of a public health emergency declared pursuant to s. 381.00315, a state of emergency which has been declared pursuant to s. 252.36 or at the scene of an emergency outside of a hospital, doctor?s office, or other place having proper medical equipment, without objection of the injured victim or victims thereof, shall not be held liable for any civil damages as a result of such care or treatment or as a result of any act or failure to act in providing or arranging further medical treatment where the person acts as an ordinary reasonably prudent person would have acted under the same or similar circumstances.
 
HappyWanderer said:
It's always a tough call whether to stop and render aid. As an EMT, I'm not covered by Good Samaritan laws. I'm also not covered by my agency when not on duty. My butt's hanging out there unprotected.

The thought process is, "Is it worth losing my house and and retirement?" before stopping to help. Sadly, the answer is usually no.

Say WHAT?

I will always stop to help, it ain't all about me.
 
"Is it worth losing my house and and retirement?"

yeah.... those 6 figure retirements are causing cops to hide behind buildings like we saw at a school shooting.


Everything gets corrupted by money.
 
NY_Dutch said:
Do a Google search on "accident victim sues good samaritan".  You may be surprised...

Not sure what you're trying to say here Dutch.
In the roughly 50 years this law has been in effect, there has been hardly any litigation. Not much case law to support a negative conclusion.  The inclusion of the words "reasonable and prudent" in the law HAS to be there to prevent a wild card for any type of reckless behavior. It's just common sense, or the vulturous PI attorneys would have a field day. (Your honor, if he would have just moved my arm a little more to the right, I wouldn't be in this constant state of pain I am today.....)

If folks are still scared of the allegedly ineffectual Good Sarmatian laws (they do vary slightly by state) consider your personal liability coverage in your homeowners policy would address this.
If you're still paranoid, buy a personal umbrella on top of that.
Just please don't stand there and stare at the bleeding based on bad information....

P.S. Few states exempt medical professionals from the G.S. law when addressing an emergency situation as long as they are not inside a medical facility, no patient relationship exists, and no fee for services is rendered.


 
Addressing Bill's original point, this is more than just living in a litigious society. Yes, that is part of the problem with no one wanting to lend a hand anymore, but it's also an indictment on society as a whole and how people have changed to think only of themselves and not care or be considerate to those around them.

When I started driving 50 years ago in the Midwest, it was common to see hitchhikers with their thumbs out looking for a ride. And it was common to stop for that stranger and give him or her a lift as far as you were going their direction. Nowadays, you don't know what that stranger might do to you; pull out a gun, a knife, or claim that you tried to harm them, attempting to extort your money.

When I started driving 50 years ago, if you saw a vehicle broke down on the side of the road and you had the time, you stopped to see if there was anything you could do to help, especially if it was a lady, because back then, there were very few women who knew anything about cars and how they ran. Nowadays, no one stops for fear it might be a set up to be robbed.

50 years ago, if you saw a lady that had fallen down and appeared to need help getting up, you stopped and gave aid and offered a ride back to where she came from. If you saw her little dog wandering away, you ran and tried to catch it, if possible, and return it to the lady. Nowadays, people are in too big a hurry to do anything for anyone else. People in today's society only think about themselves and to heck with everyone else. The Me, Me, Me generation has taken over. It's all about me and no one else.

That's why it scares me to think of what would happen if we were ever attacked by our enemies. When we entered WWII, the country banded together for a singular purpose - to defeat the enemy and have peace in the world again. Women who never worked a day of their lives outside the house went to work in factories building airplanes and manufacturing ammunition. Men enlisted to fight and those who couldn't helped the war effort at home by working in a field that would support the military. Everyone pitched in. Everyone knew there would be rationing of food, gas and other important supplies for the war, and they did what they had to do to ensure our country's survival. And they proved to the world that we were the greatest country on the face of the earth.

Would that happen today? Or would most of the American society that now exists say, "It's not my problem. Let somebody else deal with it." This country is so divisive right now, I have actually had someone ask me if I supported the current president before he would help me with a problem with my coach while in an RV park. So if we were attacked by the Chinese or Russians, what do you think would happen? Would we band together again as we did 70 years ago, or would everyone think someone else would handle the problem?

And that is why Bill's wife got no help from anyone passing by. Everyone figured someone else would do it, if the thought even crossed their minds. There is no civility in society anymore and very little chivalry. That is why my wife and I chose to spend our retirement in an RV, because it seems there are still a few people that like to RV that are cut from the old mold and believe in helping others out when they need help. Those who do so are a dying breed.
 
Bill N said:
PS:  Amanda (RVMommyto6)  You are a great addition to this forum. Thanks to you and all others who have contributed to this thread.

Bill
Thanks Bill, this is a great community, I'm thankful to have found it.
 
BinaryBob said:
Not sure what you're trying to say here Dutch.
In the roughly 50 years this law has been in effect, there has been hardly any litigation. Not much case law to support a negative conclusion.  The inclusion of the words "reasonable and prudent" in the law HAS to be there to prevent a wild card for any type of reckless behavior. It's just common sense, or the vulturous PI attorneys would have a field day. (Your honor, if he would have just moved my arm a little more to the right, I wouldn't be in this constant state of pain I am today.....)

If folks are still scared of the allegedly ineffectual Good Sarmatian laws (they do vary slightly by state) consider your personal liability coverage in your homeowners policy would address this.
If you're still paranoid, buy a personal umbrella on top of that.
Just please don't stand there and stare at the bleeding based on bad information....

P.S. Few states exempt medical professionals from the G.S. law when addressing an emergency situation as long as they are not inside a medical facility, no patient relationship exists, and no fee for services is rendered.

What I'm saying is that good samaritan laws do not protect you from lawsuits, only from the potential liability that could result from one. You would still need to defend your actions in court. Some years ago, our local volunteer rescue squad for instance, was sued severally and individually for alleged excessive damage to a fellow's expensive sports car when they cut the roof off to extract him after he rolled it at high speed. He even sued the company that made the jaws of life used to cut the roof, as well as the distributor that sold it. The case was eventually dismissed under the good samaritan law, but the legal bills for the squad still totaled nearly $40,000. Insurance covered the squad as a unit, but not individually. They were about to start a special fund raising project when the distributor and manufacturer stepped up and covered the bills that insurance didn't cover. Several members left the squad over the lawsuit, not willing to put their families at further financial risk. Good samaritan laws can protect your from being SUCCESFULLY sued, but they do not protect from being sued in the first place.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
131,917
Posts
1,387,464
Members
137,673
Latest member
7199michael
Back
Top Bottom