Good Samaritan Laws Introduction This paper wil

Good samaritan laws derived their names from the biblical tale of the traveling Samaritan who aided an injured Israelite after others refused to do so. In the United States, these laws have been enacted to address the issue of rendering emergency aid to persons who are sick or injured or who are in imminent physical danger. There are two types of good samaritan laws. The first type protects those who render emergency aid from being held liable for further injuries which may have resulted from the aid given. The second type of law imposes a duty upon individuals to render aid when they come upon another person who requires such aid.

The first type of law, restricting liability for aid rendered, is more common in Anglo-American common law countries. The second type of good samaritan law, imposing a duty to aid, has been fairly common throughout Continental European countries for some time. The reason for this is that civil law countries on the continent have never had legal doctrines which impose liability on emergency-care providers for negligent care. Common law countries, on the other

. . .
chronic condition. Fourth, the harm which is to be prevented must be serious, or there must be an imminent risk of such harm. This will tend not to include harm to property (Smith, 1990, pp. 25-32). The State of the Law As noted at the beginning of this paper, there are two different types of good samaritan laws, protection against liability and duties to aid. Laws which protect a bystander against liability for actions taken when providing aid are intended to soften the impact of the traditional common law rule. Laws which impose a duty upon bystanders to render assistance are intended to force bystanders to help those in need. Traditionally, Anglo-American common law held that a person is not liable, absent some special duty, for the failure to come to the aid of another person in danger. This doctrine applied to physicians as well as lay persons, even though a physician may be bound by an ethical duty to aid such a person. On the other hand, common law held a physician liable for any injury which resulted from his negligent emergency treatment. Thus, the law burdened a person with potential liability for attempting to aid another, while protecting the callous bystander who took no action (Frey, 1994, p. 160). As
. . .

Some common words found in the essay are:
Tocqueville American-style, Minnesota Massachusetts, Laws Introduction, Emergency Doctrine, Maine Oregon, California Arizona, Consequently California, Traditionally Anglo-American, Continental European, Samaritan Legislation, samaritan laws, common law, frey 1994, emergency aid, duty aid, imposing duty, positive duty, liability actions, samaritan legislation, duty bystanders, rendering emergency aid, imposing duty aid, common law countries, anglo-american common law, frey 1994 pp,
Approximate Word count = 2161
Approximate Pages = 9 (250 words per page)