conflict of interest...medic and carrying question

imported post

so my wife brought up an interesting question the other day.

now I FULLY UNDERSTAND THAT YOU ARE NOT LAWYERS. i'm just taking what you guys answer with and adding it to research for our own understanding.


my wife is a army trained/certified medic. and so the other day she asked me how that would work. if she finds herself in a situation where she is being assaulted and would have to use a firearm in self defense, would she still have to immediately tend to the shot person??? :lol::lol::lol::lol:

imported post

If no one else is there tosee or videotape the incident...no...let the POS bleed out.



But it would be preferred said POS be shot so many times he'd be dead before he hit the ground anyway...which would avoid thatembarassing/standing around waiting kind of thing.

But in reality, I guess she, being a medic and NOT helping, that "failure to render aid" would be lawyer fodder against her later on?

Regardless, it's really pathetic how "the law" puts good people in a bad position when it comes to dealing with criminals...that's criminal in itself!

-- John D.

imported post

scorpio_vette wrote:

so my wife brought up an interesting question the other day.

now I FULLY UNDERSTAND THAT YOU ARE NOT LAWYERS. i'm just taking what you guys answer with and adding it to research for our own understanding.


my wife is a army trained/certified medic. and so the other day she asked me how that would work. if she finds herself in a situation where she is being assaulted and would have to use a firearm in self defense, would she still have to immediately tend to the shot person??? :lol::lol::lol::lol:

Click to expand...

As a really good general rule, you should not render aid to someone you just shot. You should keep a reasonable distance between yourself and your assailant so that he cannot further endanger you. Rendering aid could get you seriously injured or killed.

imported post

Yes, thatsounds like a very good defense to use in court if she got sued (or charged criminally): "I was still afraidof the guy hurting me if I got too close, soI stayed away from him for my own safety."

Good point!

-- John D.

imported post

Justifiable homicide in my humble opinion.

If you rescue a venomous snake from a snare, it will bite you if it could.

imported post

"The Scorpion and the Frog" (or Turtle) fable comes to mind...

-- John D.

imported post

If she aims well, she should only have to make sure her assailants eyes are closed.

I dont think she would be required to lend aid, as a victim her only real requirement would be to contact the authority. My .02

imported post

If there isn't anyone esle around but her and the perp, it would probably be a bad idea to get near the perp. If there are others around that can assist incase the perp tries anything, maybe, but after the perp can be checked for other weaons.

If your wife is a good shot, there may not be anything she can do for the perp, anyway.

imported post

I've read your description of your wife's situation a couple of times just to be sure I understand it accurately - and I'm still not there.

Is she A) an active duty/Reserves (but may have some other employment if Reserves), or B) got her medic training in the Army & is now employed as a medic somewhere as a honorably discharger service member?

If A, her medic status is only in relation to her military service and should have no bearing on professional responsibilities issues - based on the fact that I am not an attorney and have not looked up the specific state & federal laws/regs but am going on general principles. She is a medic in the Army but not licensed/certified by the State of Wisconsin as a Medic/Paramedic/EMT or any other such. Her only responsibility is to care for wounded/injured soldiers.

If B, the question gets complicated by whether or not she was acting on-duty when the assault went down and it was directly related to her on-duty status. In other words, did she get A) a call to respond to Sumdood being "down" and in need of medic care and when she arrived Sumdood assaulted her, or B) she got a call regarding Thatguy and when she arrived on scene Sumdood (who was not involved in any way with Thatguy needing a medic) popped up out of nowhere and assaulted her.

Case A: Sumdood's assault could be interpreted as refusal of medical care as well as an assault. In either case, now that she has shotSumdood she has committed a crime and can not contaminate the crime scene. (Even a rightious shoot starts out as a homicide, with self defense as the affirmative defense of justified/excusable homicide.) She needs to call the cops and another emergency medical care provider.

Case B: Now that she has shotSumdood she has committed a crime and can not contaminate the crime scene. (Even a rightious shoot starts out as a homicide, with self defense as the affirmative defense of justified/excusable homicide.) She needs to call the cops and an emergency medical care provider.

Case C (just to cover the bases): Sumdood shot Thatguy and when your wife the on-duty medic rolls up Sumdood assaults her - or Thatguy again -trying to make sure that Thatguy dies. Your wife shoots Sumdood. Now that she has shotSumdood she has committed a crime and can not contaminate the crime scene. (Even a rightious shoot starts out as a homicide, with self defense as the affirmative defense of justified/excusable homicide.) She needs to call the cops and another emergency medical care provider.



Hope that helps you figure out the appropriate response. If she is employed as an emergency medical care responder she ought to submit the question to her employer and her professional licensing board -- but change "shoot" to "defend" as I'll bet carrying on duty is not allowed by regs and employer policy.

stay safe.

skidmark

imported post

This question came up in my PI training ... the answer was from a former OHP ... and this is how he answered under state of OK ... IANAL ...

Assuming me (the licensed armed PI) was the shooter: after handcuffing, then render aid to the point of Triage ... basically, stop the bleeding, cover sucking chest wounds. Other than that, do not render any other aid even if you are trained. Like Skidmark said, once you pull the trigger, you are now a victim of the assault and notany other professional.

OK does have the Good Samaritan protections for non-professional medical assistance.

If you are a medical professional, in OK, you would not be protected under Good Samaritan, but would be protected under your work-place liability.

As for the concerns about contaminating a crime scene, life takes precedence ... just be sure you can account for all your actions to the detectives when you give your statement ... after you have consulted with an attorney. Never give a statement at the scene ... there have been several posts which have good statements to give at the scene which will give you time to contact an attorney.

As a medical professional, you should have access to an attorney through work so that you will be able to ask for clarification.

Good luck, and remember, once you fire that gun, you are now a victim of a crime and your professional standing does not require you to render aid to someone who has just tried to assault you with deadly force.

IANAL.

imported post

@skidmark--- she was an active duty army medic, also spend time overseas in the army, and now is in the reserves. but her civilian career is NOT related to the medical field in any way.

based on the responses in this thread, i just asked the wife, and she said: " i am a nationaly regeistered emergency medical technitian - (EMT) its a civilian certification. there are 3 levels of EMT - EMT-B (me) - EMT- intermediate and EMT paramedic - the paramedics can do IV's and push drugs. in the army my skills are level to the intermediate but i can only do the "basic" skills on the civilian side."

imported post

scorpio_vette wrote:

@skidmark--- she was an active duty army medic, also spend time overseas in the army, and now is in the reserves. but her civilian career is NOT related to the medical field in any way.

based on the responses in this thread, i just asked the wife, and she said: " i am a nationaly regeistered emergency medical technitian - (EMT) its a civilian certification. there are 3 levels of EMT - EMT-B (me) - EMT- intermediate and EMT paramedic - the paramedics can do IV's and push drugs. in the army my skills are level to the intermediate but i can only do the "basic" skills on the civilian side."

Click to expand...

She may be nationally registered (on a list of folks who passed some exam(s) )but it has no bearing on her actions or responsibilities in your original question because she is NOT employed as an EMT. Based on my readings - see below - she would have to present her qualifications and pay fees to be considered an EMT in Wisconsin, and one of the requirements is that she be employed by someone in an EMT position.

Wisconsin's Good Samaritan law is explained here: http://www.wisbar.org/AM/Template.cfm?Section=Home&CONTENTID=66146&TEMPLATE=/CM/ContentDisplay.cfm

The Wisconsin EMS Association web site is here: http://www.wisconsinems.com/default.asp Your wife is encouraged to contact them to get a professional opinion on her legal duty to treat or not treat based on not being employed as an EMT. The University of Wisconsin School of Emergency Medical Care http://www.uwhealth.org/emergency-education/emergency-education-center-eec/10447also ought to be able to offer guidance.

Apparently these folks http://dhs.wi.gov/ems/EMSsection/EMSBoards.htmare the official word on all things EMS and ought to be consulted.

As for okboomer's comment that life takes precedence, I agree on an ethical/moral standpoint but I'm not going to suggest that anybody commit a felony by altering or tampering with evidence. Keep in mind that calling 911 does qualify as rendering aid. This issue is probably worthy of a firestorm of commentary, but I am going to try to forestall that by saying that your wife needs to consult the three (3) organizations I pointed to above as well as a qualified attorney who is versed in medical liability/ malpractice and emergency medical care issues. Until she does that or we get an attorney qualified in those areas to chime in, I think the issue ought to let alone by armchair lawyers and others with opinions on "how it ought to be".

Anybody who can cite case law regarding "tampering with evidence" [I'm putting it in quotation marks here to suggest there might be other terms used as well] and the rendering of first aid or more advanced medical care by the shooter is invited to post it.

I hope you can report back to us on what your wife learned.

stay safe.

skidmark

imported post

civilian side - EMTs wont have guns and police always secure the scene first

over seas - whos really going to care if you let him bleed out:lol:

really though i think it would depend on her and if she wanted too, i doubt her command is going to make her treat someone she just shot outof fear for her own life that would be pretty messed up and being that shaken up they wouldnt be getting very good care probably.

id say no, you wouldnt have to treat the person you just shot

edit - i think i got a little carried away with the military though. stateside, at least here in AZ, you dont have to treat someone if your off duty and personally i wouldnt treat someone that i just had to shoot out of self defense

imported post

Her responsibility starts with defending/protecting herself and calling 911. After that it depends on how safe she feels and how much she wants to and is able to do for the wounded man. If he is still a danger to her she has no obligation to assist him, self preservation comes first. I'm no lawyer but I drove by a Motel 6 once.