Rank: Guest 
|
Posted By Phil Parkin
How much first aid should an appointed person be allowed to administer?
I say emergencies only.
Qualified first aiders should be giving general day to day first aid.
Can anyone settle a site argument?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Mitch
I am an appointed person and would only get involved in emergencies not day to day first aid, if someone wants a plaster and there is no 1st aider they can put it on themselves!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Tabs
"I say emergencies only."
So, start by defining an emergency...
The trouble with that stance is that some people will shrug off a blow the head which has left them concussed, or slap a plaster over a cut caused by contaminated steel, leading to septic shock. In the first case a quick check of the eyes can be revealing, and most first aiders will know what symptoms to warn of, and the action needed (hospital). In the second case, the FA will clean the cut and ask about tetanus cover.
A Paper cut? I agree it is probably minor irritation - but who has the plasters? If it bleeds, do you want them walking around the teapoint? leaving blood on switches?
If someone has a minor scald, how do they decide it is minor, 5%, 15%, full depth?
I think let the first aider provide first aid. If they feel their time is being wasted by individuals, have a mechanism for correcting it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Heather Collins
Tabs - you miss the point. The OP was asking how much Appointed Persons should be allowed to do in the absence of a first aider.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
|
Posted By Tabs
Oops! I missed by a mile, sorry.
Ahem, then yes, I agree with the poster. Only as much as they are trained in.
(memo to self: read the posts properly, lad).
Thanks Heather
|
|
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.