Would you still get involved?

[dgreenh]

I've never been involved in a rescue. I would think that in the heat of a rescue, I would be focused on the tasks at hand and probably would not know if someone was video taping the situation or not. So, no, it wouldn't affect my rescue attempts.

 

[Montana Diver]

I was a ski patroller for 25 years and never gave it a thought about if someone was around filming...goes to the single-minded focus of rescue. If I am in charge, then I will triage the scene and direct responder resources as needed, until I hand off to a higher care giver.

As I work towards my rescue diver, I hope that I will never need o use my training, however as much as I would like to rationalize hypothetically that I would hesitate or limit my involvement, I know that I would become involved.

As an active patroller I carried a million dollar umbrella policy over all my assets. Thankfully I never had to use it, however the training was invaluable when I performed CPR and saved a gentleman's life.

 

[FuzzyNutz]

I haven't taken the rescue course (hopefully by the end of the summer though!), but I have been cpr certified 3 times in the past (not currently) - and I would still help as much as I possibly could, regardless of incident or cameras. It's my natural instinct to react to any sort of accident... see a car accident, find out if the people are ok, someone falls skiing/boarding, biking, or skating, see if they're ok, etc. I'm not a parent, but ask any parent that's never had any sort of rescue anything if they would watch their child fall in the water, get hurt, choke... and not do anything?

Accidents mixed with water can get really dangerous, really fast. There's really no time to hesitate to think about cameras, lawsuits, or if someone else is gonna do it... someone's life is on the line.

 

[Cave Diver]

... therein lies the rub. You give a lawyer a video of just about any real-life rescue and they will certainly find something in it that wasn't covered in your training ...

... Bob (Grateful Diver)

Good Samaritan laws do not protect you from everything. It is human nature to make mistakes. Good Samaritan laws take this into account and protect helpful citizens if the mistakes made are reasonable.

I may do something that wasn't covered in my training, but I'll take my chances that I won't do something that would likely be considered unreasonable enough to land me in trouble.

A bastardization of the phrase "all the is required for evil to triumph is for good men to stand by and do nothing" comes to mind. I would have a very hard time standing by and doing nothing if I was the most qualified person on scene to render aid to someone needing it.

 

[RJP]

Have been involved in life-or-death rescue situation; can't imagine having an extra brain cell to spare thinking about anything other than the task at hand.

 

[adurso]

I may do something that wasn't covered in my training, but I'll take my chances that I won't do something that would likely be considered unreasonable enough to land me in trouble.

A bastardization of the phrase "all the is required for evil to triumph is for good men to stand by and do nothing" comes to mind. I would have a very hard time standing by and doing nothing if I was the most qualified person on scene to render aid to someone needing it.

As long as you are not making an egregious error, such as attempting the television style cricoidectomy or tracheotomy...or dragging protesting patient from an ovetrurned auto

 

[Cave Diver]

As long as you are not making an egregious error, such as attempting the television style cricoidectomy or tracheotomy...or dragging protesting patient from an ovetrurned auto

Nope, I'm not trained for those although I've seem McGyver do it with a swiss army knife and a ball point pen!

And no moving victims unless they are in imminent danger where they are, or must be moved in order to render aid to them or someone who needs it more.

 

[Hypno-toad]

I have not been rescue trained, I am only just OW certified.

I know for darn sure if I was the one needing rescue, I would want the ones doing the rescue to worry more about saving my life than the camera pointed at them. It is with this notion that I would do whatever possible (be it dialing 911 from shore or helping to get a diver out of the water) when needed of me, camera or not. I would never, EVER get in the way of a real rescuer, but I would do all possible to assist them/the injured diver.

I would feel worse of my inaction during an incident than my action, minor or major as it may be.

 

[dbulmer]

NWG,
Yes to both questions.
In general I think that a victim is entitled to privacy unless there is reason to suspect foul play. The problem with video footage is that important facts relating to an incident may not be evident in the footage but may be ascertained through talking to the rescuers/participants directly.

A video camera would not change my thinking regarding a rescue but I would hope that bystanders would appreciate the gravity of it all and be respectful towards the rescuers and victim.

Equally I think rescuers are emotionally involved and need to be aware that some spectators may be assessing the situation to see if they can help while others may just be ghouls who are not worth the time and effort to interact with.

 

[adurso]

Nope, I'm not trained for those although I've seem McGyver do it with a swiss army knife and a ball point pen!

*SNIP*.

That is the one that gets people.....there was a case where the defendant had attempted a tracheotomy on a person who was choking, the defendant had "seen it on tv", and when the victim bled to death the defendant "panicked" and buried the body in the victim's yard....he was very surprised to be charged with murder...