Hi Sutty, It's a common misunderstanding but neither point is true. Under UK law, any civil action brought against an individual for attampting first aid (within the limits of their skills and knowledge) will be dismissed. Further, there is no legal obligation for first aiders to assist. However, the same is not true in some other countries and this is where the rumours stem from. Hope that helps.

This debate seems to come around every now and then. There is no specific duty of care that applies to a first aider to render assistance in the event of someone being injured. In fact no medical staff doctors or nurses have a duty of care to render aid when out of work, only midwives have a duty of care to help a pregnant woman. The is an obligation on the first aider at work to render first aid as an employee. As for being sued there has been no successful case brought against a first aider who rendered aid within the limits of their training. Some years ago St John Ambulance were taken to a civil court over an incident in which a motorcyclist was left paralysed after they had rendered aid. The case was thrown out of court when it was quickly established the first aiders had followed their training. They had done everything they could within the limits of their training so could not be held responsible. I was a senior officer in the British Red Cross for many years and never knew of any case being successfully brought against any first aider. The risk must have been extremely low as the insurance premium per member paid by the Society was very very small.

This has always been my understanding of the situation. When at a previous employer we had issues with staff not wanting to complete first aid training because of these issues

I'm with Canopener on this - perhaps not the case that all/any cases would be dismissed. Doubt anyone can predict how courts react today, tomorrow or next year! But as regards the "employee/workplace" scenario the majority - if not all - Employers' Liability policies are extended to include such matters as: Maintenance of own property: So even if firm is a printer (say) an employee who falls off roof of factory could claim against the employer Private work for Directors: So as above, if an employee who falls off roof of director's house whilst putting up the Chirstams lights they could claim against the employer Provison of First Aid: Those who adminster FA are regarded as "working" Remember that wording of policy is that the acident that gives rise to the claim has to result from the declared business, has to have occured in connection with the business. This is to ensure the insurners can charge the correct premium: a builder builds, but doesn't engage in demolition, similarly a printer prints things doesn't undertake building work. So, in an workplace scenario a First Aider would be "copvered" in that a claim against them would be unlikely - the claim would be made against the employer who would be vicariously liable. Phil

I get tired of arguing this during training it is a ongoing argument... I just tell people - why don't we all just stand around and video it (it might go viral and make me infamous) - whilst your child suffocates on their own vomit... Usually does the trick to enforce the moral argument. What a world we live in where people are afraid to help someone in need, and all based on hearsay and rumour;posters above have made it clear there is no legal argument. I like to think I work to change this attitude, with work in the voluntary first aid sector and through my safety work. @JohnC - it was my understanding Doctors and (I thought) Nurses had to help as they have signed up to a code of conduct much like the IOSH charter- this is supported by an oath for doctors. Just checked with wife (Nurse) - and apparently for Nurses Registration relies on application of duty of care - registration can be revoked for failing to assist - even out of work. Happy to be corrected but can you direct to a source.. For OP - this is not the case for first aiders - there is no legal duty to assist (but obviously from my post and the one above a strong moral one)

Sutty, while there is potential for litigation (and I think it quite wrong to suggest that any such case will be summarily dismissed) there aren't as far as I know any successful cases in the UK and if a first aider or anyone else giving first act, acts in 'good faith', and doesn't do anything that might otherwise be considered to be (grossly) negligent, then I suggest that they have little to fear.

Yes, I agree and I think that this is what both of my posts are saying (aren't they?). I also think it unlikely and I feel that first aiders have little to fear. There is of course a moral obligation, and I have not as far as I can see, suggested otherwise. In fact I haven't commented on the moral issue. I personally would happily give 'first aid' or assist anyone both in or outside of work without a second thought as to whether I would be subsequently sued. For the most part those fears are generally unfounded. However, it do not agree that ANY or EVERY case WILL be dismissed; this will depend on the circumstances and I for one can't second guess what a judge or jury might decide; they sometimes appear to make some strange decisions. So, while being found liable is unlikely, I suggest it is not impossible. Of course, it is interesting to note that St John is one organisation that provides insurance for that very eventuality.

Hi Canopener, I was in total agreement with you, I was trying to demonstrate that... Sorry if it came across differently. I wouldn't suggest impossible, especially if somebody tried to do something for which they weren't trained. First aiders (good ones) are hard to come by, so it's sad that this kind of scaremongering still exists in society (not on these posts though). Happy Friday :-)

This is a hardy perennial for this and other similar forii [or forums]. The main issues have been very efficiently and accurately well-aired and I so I'll stick to my thoughts. Within the UK I consider that any talk on the potential for First-Aiders to be sued [or even sometimes criminally liable] will have a conveniently handy insurance scheme somewhere close-by. I don't provide FA training [I just don't; OK] but I still come across apparently respectable, independent providers who fortuitously have a contact with an insurer when this question is raised! Those who promote the thought [and the insurance] stand to gain financially - that's it! Frank Hallett

Cut and pasted from HSE website on FAQ for first aid Can legal action be taken against first-aiders? It is very unlikely that any action would be taken against a first-aider who was using the first-aid training they have received. HSE cannot give any specific advice on this issue as it does not fall within HSE's statutory powers. It is recommended that you seek legal advice, or advice from your employer's insurance brokers on whether their policies cover first-aiders' liability.

Let´s dwell on the implications of not administering first aid.....

As JohnC says any HCPC registered practitioner Nurse/Paramedic has a duty to do use their skills when they can to assist. The biggest point in all of this is the giving of consent either implied or informed. There is normally some information passed during the first aid courses....in what form that takes especially if your are dealing with an unconscious or a person who's first language is not English... The Resus council guide goes a little way to explain it. http://www.resus.org.uk/pages/legal.pdf