The myths your alluding to do get brought up in First Aid courses by the instructor, its to counter nonsense like yours.
Another rude response. As I’ve said above the fact of the matter is that a first aid course *does not* disapply civil or criminal law. If you (or a first aid course instructor) think it does then you fundamentally misunderstand the position. The only “nonsense” I’ve seen on this thread is your own ludicrous claims to give “guarantees” along these lines.
The risk of being prosecuted/sued/accused of inappropriate behaviour might be pretty remote, but *low* risk certainly doesn’t equal *no* risk.
But then you wouldn't be at one.
You’re quite right I wouldn’t be. Along with a very high % of the population, it’s simply not something I have any particular flair for, or interest in learning about. Giving first aid most certainly isn’t part of my job. If I wanted to do that I’d be a paramedic, not a train driver.
Yet I would certainly be annoyed should it was you I helped a child wouldn't have been given any considerations should they need help off you, I mean they might sue you.
This makes no sense and is impossible to follow.
I'd gladly go to court for helping someone out. What would the charge be ''Guilty of assault'' you stopped them bleeding to death by touching them?Should I put in a counter claim for my blood stained T-Shirt?
As is this.
As has been stated this is saferguarded under the legislation mentioned previously.
That legislation is not a cast iron guarantee, though, and it would have absolutely no impact against an allegation of improper behaviour.
If rail staff happen to have done first aid training under their own steam and wish to intervene then good luck to them. In my view it wouldn’t be right for this kind of training to be made compulsory for rail staff as that might then imply an obligation to directly assist in all situations, even where that person doesn’t feel comfortable doing so.
I’d certainly have no objection to it being made available on a strictly voluntary basis, but of course cost considerations will apply. People on here moan constantly about how high fares are and the money for this would have to come from somewhere.
My company's policy is that a customer should always be removed from the train when ill, the exceptions being:
1. If you suspect a spinal injury, with the knowledge that this is extremely unlikely on a train
2. If the person is too large, or volatile to move, without possibly causing injury to yourself
3. If the person is in an active stage of a seizure
I think most TOCs have similar now. Of course that policy has issues in practice as often a call to 999 will result in the operator instructing the caller not to move the patient until the emergency services have arrived and assessed the situation (unless that has changed?).
It’s a little difficult for a train guard (or whoever) to disregard this and again TOC control asking them to do so puts someone basically into an impossible position. In practice what often still seems to happen is an agreement to continue to the nearest suitable station and wait for the ambulance crew there.
I completely accept that the position becomes a lot more tricky with intense metro ops, LU etc. where you’ve then got to weigh up other risks created by people being stuck on trains in tunnels, possibly in hot and crowded conditions, with no access to help until trains start moving again.