man hurt in parking lot of hospital needs to call an ambulance

[telecom_goddess]

http://www.kgw.com/news/local/Advent...115729339.html

A man who crashed in a hospital parking lot, 100 yards away from the er, was not able to receive help until the officer who was a witness and assisting him called an ambulance, so they could follow proper protocol.

He ended up giving the guy cpr so he wouldn't die while they waited for protocol and the blasted ambulance to arrive and transport him 100 yards away.

Rules and regs are getting to be ridiculous...when it becomes a matter of life or death break the damn rules!

[Greenday]

Bet they charged him a shitload of money for the ambulance ride too.

[telecom_goddess]

Bet they charged him a shitload of money for the ambulance ride too.

I know! Money that could have been saved.....not to mention other people away from the hospital who may need that ambulance worse than this guy....I mean they could have wheeled a gurney right out there and got him.

[HYHYBT]

I understand it. I don't *agree,* but I understand, with a bit of assumption. The problem isn't the ambulance itself; after all, people walk into emergency rooms all the time, or are brought in by relatives, etc. But this guy had just been in an accident, and was unconscious. What's the first thing you're told? Don't try to move them until they're examined by someone who knows what they're doing. That would be the paramedics, who happen to be in the ambulance. And any doctors in the ER would probably be occupied with people who have already been admitted.

[Andara Bledin]

I don't buy it, HYHYBT.

Well, I don't want to, but it seems that this is not only standard procedure, but not uncommon, either.

Article at Oregon Live

I still don't see how calling 911 and causing an ambulance to roll for someone already on the premises is responsible behavior. At that point, it should be up to the hospital to determine whether they have staff on had or to call for EMTs, as they already have access to that network.

The cynical part of me thinks that this is a ploy to force anyone experiencing an emergency to rely solely on ambulances for transport to the ER as a boost to the revenue generated therefrom.

^-.-^

[Rageaholic]

Rules and regs are getting to be ridiculous...when it becomes a matter of life or death break the damn rules!

Exactly. Rules and policies are fine to determine how to do things, but there are times when common sense trumps the rules. This is one of those cases.

The cynical part of me thinks that this is a ploy to force anyone experiencing an emergency to rely solely on ambulances for transport to the ER as a boost to the revenue generated therefrom.

^-.-^

That's probably what it was, anything for money. Those greedy bastards...

[muses_nightmare]

This reminds me of this story: http://www.ctvbc.ctv.ca/servlet/an/l...10122/20110122

[HYHYBT]

Exactly. Rules and policies are fine to determine how to do things, but there are times when common sense trumps the rules. This is one of those cases.

The trouble is, when common sense and rules collide, if you follow common sense and things end badly, you get sued out of existence. It doesn't matter whether anything you possibly could have done or not done would have prevented it. In this case, it *sounds* like he probably would have died no matter what. Following the rules (assuming that really is what happened) has gotten the hospital bad publicity, and will probably get them sued anyway, but they have at least a chance of winning. Whereas, somewhat like the case of the drunk driver a few threads ago, *not* following them leads to the automatic assumption that if you had things would have turned out better.

[FArchivist]

Exactly. Rules and policies are fine to determine how to do things, but there are times when common sense trumps the rules. This is one of those cases.

I can give you a one-word reason for rules over common sense: liability
Helping someone is great...till you are sued into bankruptcy over it.

[Rageaholic]

*sigh* it always does come down to protecting yourself from getting sued. We're too sue happy, but that's for another thread.

[FArchivist]

*sigh* it always does come down to protecting yourself from getting sued. We're too sue happy, but that's for another thread.

The problem is that when you restrict whom you can sue and for what, you will always inadvertently restrict correct cases along with frivolous ones because there's no way in law to assign moral or value judgment to a case previous to trial. That's why tort reform is so often resisted.

However, I became personally opposed to the idea of "duty to rescue" after these two cases:

http://articles.sfgate.com/2008-12-1...court-s-ruling

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...-It-fault.html

[Mytical]

Calling an ambulance in the parking lot of an ER is just ridiculous. It can't be about liability..or are they saying that all the other doctors, except for the ambulance ones, are incompetent?

As for helping others. I think I'd rather risk getting sued then standing by and doing nothing if somebody needs help. My conscious wouldn't allow anything less.

[Racket_Man]

I thought that most states have laws/rules on the book shielding "Good Samaritians" or shielding emergancy responders in a chrisis stiuation.

I guess those went by the wayside in our sue happy culture.

[crazylegs]

The situation as described as by the OP is the same at my local hosp. Bear in mind we have socialised healthcare so there's no element of cash making to be had.

Re the two examples given - the one incident that's the Daily Mail article, it would appear that the gentleman in question stopped on the opposite carriageway then crossed a live motorway on foot to the scene, that's not being a good samaritan that's being a fool.

[blas87]

I refuse to be taken anywhere in an ambulance unless there is something so wrong with me that I may not survive the ride to the hospital otherwise.

Speaking with a coworker who has a lot of health problems and has more than once had to be taken by ambulance from work, she has told me exactly how much it costs to ride in an ambulance. They even charge you to put you on the stretcher, they charge you for putting you IN the ambulance, they charge you for the ride itself (that is $100 out of pocket right there!) and they charge you seperately for every single instrument or procedure they have to do to you on your way to the hospital, and they also charge you to take you OUT of the ambulance and to wheel you IN to the hospital.

Yeah. If I'm going anywhere in an ambulance, I better be dying.

Edit to add: For one year (last year), we had a third insurance option that costed much dinero, but was designed for people with chronic health problems and constant need of medical care, because this policy had no co-pays for office visits, and the co-pay on an ER visit or ambulance ride were very inexpensive. For whatever reason, they did not go with this option for this year, and a lot of coworkers were irate about it.