What happened to the "good samaritian" law?

[Jimmy B.]

A month or two ago AOPA had a article about a "good samaritan" bill that
would help protect pilots who fly for charity. AOPA asked the members
to write to their congress critters to urge them to pass the bill.

I haven't heard anything about how that turned out. Anyone have
information on it? I have a feeling that it stalled because I think
AOPA would have announced its passage.

I have to admit, the liability issue is one of the reasons that I don't
fly Angel Flights.

[Cub Driver]

On Sun, 10 Jul 2005 18:39:43 GMT, "Jimmy B."
> wrote:

>I have to admit, the liability issue is one of the reasons that I don't
>fly Angel Flights.

I know a doctor who won't wear a cadesus (however spelled :) on his
car because he fears being stopped by police at the scene of an
accident, thus exposing him to a lawsuit.


-- all the best, Dan Ford

email (put Cubdriver in subject line)

Warbird's Forum: www.warbirdforum.com
Piper Cub Forum: www.pipercubforum.com
the blog: www.danford.net
In Search of Lost Time: www.readingproust.com

[Matt Barrow]

"Cub Driver" > wrote in message
...
> On Sun, 10 Jul 2005 18:39:43 GMT, "Jimmy B."
> > wrote:
>
> >I have to admit, the liability issue is one of the reasons that I don't
> >fly Angel Flights.
>
> I know a doctor who won't wear a cadesus (however spelled :) on his
> car because he fears being stopped by police at the scene of an
> accident, thus exposing him to a lawsuit.
>

Those snake thingies are called Medusas.

Doctors stopped putting them on their cars YEARS ago...long before the
current liability fiasco took hold.

[Gary Drescher]

"Matt Barrow" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Cub Driver" > wrote in message
> ...
>> On Sun, 10 Jul 2005 18:39:43 GMT, "Jimmy B."
>> > wrote:
>>
>> >I have to admit, the liability issue is one of the reasons that I don't
>> >fly Angel Flights.
>>
>> I know a doctor who won't wear a cadesus (however spelled :) on his
>> car because he fears being stopped by police at the scene of an
>> accident, thus exposing him to a lawsuit.
>
> Those snake thingies are called Medusas.

No, they're called caducei (singular: caduceus). A caduceus depicts two
intertwined snakes. (Medusa was a character in Greek mythology whose hair
turned into snakes.)

--Gary

[Gary Drescher]

"Jimmy B." > wrote in message
k.net...
> I have to admit, the liability issue is one of the reasons that I don't
> fly Angel Flights.

Has anyone ever been sued for flying an Angel Flight mission? I'd think the
chance would be less than when flying random friends and neighbors, since 1)
Angel Flight generates much goodwill, and 2) there's a liability waiver that
the passengers must sign (not absolute protection, but still better than
nothing).

--Gary

[jmk]

To the best of my knowledge, there have been ZERO suits of Angel Flight
pilots with regard to any mission flown.

Given some of the frivilous lawsuits that are filed in the US every
day, well... you can pretty much sue anyone for anything. Doesn't mean
you are going to win. At some point you just have to make a judgement
call about how you want to live your life. A doctor refusing to stop
and render aid for fear he might be sued??? Maybe he SHOULD be sued...
for not helping when he could.

[Peter R.]

jmk > wrote:

> A doctor refusing to stop and render aid for fear he might be sued???

I thought that these US-based lawsuits were exactly what the "Good
Samaritan" law passed so many years ago was designed to prevent? Is this
not the case anymore?

--
Peter
























----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

[Mike Granby]

Good Samaritan laws vary from state to state.

[David Kazdan]

Gary Drescher wrote:
> "Matt Barrow" > wrote in message
> ...
>
>>"Cub Driver" > wrote in message
...
>>
>>>On Sun, 10 Jul 2005 18:39:43 GMT, "Jimmy B."
> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>I have to admit, the liability issue is one of the reasons that I don't
>>>>fly Angel Flights.
>>>
>>>I know a doctor who won't wear a cadesus (however spelled :) on his
>>>car because he fears being stopped by police at the scene of an
>>>accident, thus exposing him to a lawsuit.
>>
>>Those snake thingies are called Medusas.
>
>
> No, they're called caducei (singular: caduceus). A caduceus depicts two
> intertwined snakes. (Medusa was a character in Greek mythology whose hair
> turned into snakes.)
>
> --Gary
>
>

But actually, the symbol of medicine is the staff of Asclepius, which
has only one snake. This pretty well tells the tale:

http://www.in-ta.net/info/aesculapius/iatros.html

David

[Matt Barrow]

"Peter R." > wrote in message
...
> jmk > wrote:
>
> > A doctor refusing to stop and render aid for fear he might be sued???
>
> I thought that these US-based lawsuits were exactly what the "Good
> Samaritan" law passed so many years ago was designed to prevent? Is this
> not the case anymore?

They are in effect in some states. They don't cover doctors.

[Gary Drescher]

"Matt Barrow" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Peter R." > wrote in message
> ...
>> jmk > wrote:
>>
>> > A doctor refusing to stop and render aid for fear he might be sued???
>>
>> I thought that these US-based lawsuits were exactly what the "Good
>> Samaritan" law passed so many years ago was designed to prevent? Is this
>> not the case anymore?
>
> They are in effect in some states. They don't cover doctors.

No, that's not true. Here in Massachusetts, for example, Part I, Title XVI,
Ch. 112, 12B states: "No physician... who, in good faith, as a volunteer and
without fee, renders emergency care or treatment, other than in the ordinary
course of his practice, shall be liable in a suit for damages as a result of
his acts or omissions...".

http://www.mass.gov/legis/laws/mgl/112-12b.htm

--Gary

[vincent p. norris]

>I know a doctor who won't wear a cadesus (however spelled :) on his
>car because he fears being stopped by police at the scene of an
>accident, thus exposing him to a lawsuit.

Dan, are you saying that doctor drives right past an accident site
without stopping to help the injured?

That's outrageous! Either (1) he should be defrocked, or whatever
they do to unethical docs, or (2) the laws that force him to do that
need to be changed right now!

vince norris

[Dylan Smith]

On 2005-07-10, Jimmy B. > wrote:
> I have to admit, the liability issue is one of the reasons that I don't
> fly Angel Flights.

I think that might be being a tad extreme. No one (to my knowledge) has
ever been sued over the many thousands of Angel Flights. When I lived in
the US, I used to do occasional Angel Flight - the risk exposure from
liability is so much tinier than the risk to my own life and limb from
flying gliders on the weekend that I didn't even consider liability. I'd
have done many more Angel Flights had I owned an IFR capable plane (I
had to schedule club planes for the job since the C140 wasn't really
suitable).

I think it's easy to blow up liability risks out of all proportion
(mainly due to a few well publicized cases) meaning the rational mind is
being overriden by the irrational, emotional mind. You might as well not
go outside just in case you get struck by lightning.

Believe me, the rewards of Angel Flight far outweigh any liability
risks.

--
Dylan Smith, Castletown, Isle of Man
Flying: http://www.dylansmith.net
Frontier Elite Universe: http://www.alioth.net
"Maintain thine airspeed, lest the ground come up and smite thee"

[Victor J. Osborne, Jr.]

I was PIC in a serious accident on an Angel Flight and my insurance rep.
told me there has never been a successful suit. FWIW.

The point of so much of today's legislation seems to be knee-jerk reactions
to 'borrowed trouble' or Chicken Little's "The sky is falling!"
--

Thx, {|;-)

Victor J. (Jim) Osborne, Jr.
"Dylan Smith" > wrote in message
...
> On 2005-07-10, Jimmy B. > wrote:
>> I have to admit, the liability issue is one of the reasons that I don't
>> fly Angel Flights.
>
> I think that might be being a tad extreme. No one (to my knowledge) has
> ever been sued over the many thousands of Angel Flights. When I lived in
> the US, I used to do occasional Angel Flight - the risk exposure from
> liability is so much tinier than the risk to my own life and limb from
> flying gliders on the weekend that I didn't even consider liability. I'd
> have done many more Angel Flights had I owned an IFR capable plane (I
> had to schedule club planes for the job since the C140 wasn't really
> suitable).
>
> I think it's easy to blow up liability risks out of all proportion
> (mainly due to a few well publicized cases) meaning the rational mind is
> being overriden by the irrational, emotional mind. You might as well not
> go outside just in case you get struck by lightning.
>
> Believe me, the rewards of Angel Flight far outweigh any liability
> risks.
>
> --
> Dylan Smith, Castletown, Isle of Man
> Flying: http://www.dylansmith.net
> Frontier Elite Universe: http://www.alioth.net
> "Maintain thine airspeed, lest the ground come up and smite thee"