Liability over lending a hand
Re “Good Samaritans get no aid from high court,” Dec. 19
The California Supreme Court has decided to vindicate immorality by encouraging the common man to bypass an accident scene and forgo giving assistance to avoid liability. The season of giving is apparently no longer prudent.
I now understand why, at two separate car accidents in recent years, drivers sped by with nary a glance while my wife and I attended to injured and very scared individuals. We clearly did not comprehend our personal liability when we screeched to a halt and offered help, despite not being formally trained medical personnel.
I can only wonder if the otherwise immensely grateful victims would have survived without our clumsy tourniquets and limb immobilizations.
Paul J. Zalesky
It seems to me people are making a tempest in a teapot of this issue.
People have been using the “fear of getting sued” excuse to avoid doing anything at accident scenes for years. Anyone who can soothe his or her conscience at watching someone bleed to death by thinking it was better than getting dragged into court would not care if the court had said good Samaritans could not be sued.
Because there is always bound to be another reason why someone could sue a would-be rescuer, those who choose not to be good Samaritans will always be able to stand aside and protect their wallets instead of their fellow humans.