BEEKEEPING LEARNING CENTER > STICKIED POSTS
Howto: Administer an Epinephrine Shot
1of6:
It's like life insurance - no one wants to have to use it. I understand your thought though.
If they want to sue me, I'll gladly have it. I'll even have them over for dinner the following week if they're alive to eat with me. :) I'd feel worse doing nothing. Neglect is a terrible thing.
Nelly:
I got the pen because my kids do beekeeping with me, and I just want to be prepared. I got the rx from my doctor, taking my kid's weights into consideration for the proper dosage.
Susan
DennisD:
--- Quote from: Romahawk on September 04, 2008, 07:11:26 pm ---
--- Quote from: 1of6 on September 03, 2008, 04:27:13 pm ---What is required to get an epipen? No one in my family is allergic, but I'd feel better having one around in case someone in the neighborhood does have an allergic reaction.
--- End quote ---
You might want to check and see what the liability might be if you administered a shot to someone other than yourself. That might come under the heading of practicing medicine without a license.
--- End quote ---
You are allowed to ASSIST someone administer their OWN Epi injection. If you use YOUR Epi-pen and can articulate it's use to save LIFE, you are covered under a broad spectrum of the "Good Samaritan Act". Now, this is "within reason" and must meet the criteria where "another person of similar understanding and means would have acted the same", this is a way of saying "Just because someone is having a heart attack, does not provide you with the legal freedom to perform open heart surgery. Although a person with a good grasp of an emergency tracheotomy would fall under the same legal protection of the Good Samaritan Act where an ill or injured person's airway was closed at the epiglottis and this technique was performed by a "lay person" that had a "reasonable understanding" of this form of "intervention" to save a life.
Caveat for MEDICAL PROFESSIONALS: Check with your state's protocols concerning the GOOD SAMARITAN ACT and your SCOPE OF PRACTICE -v- negligence (In acting above and beyond scope of practice or a reasonable person with the same training -v- would they have acted similarly) as some states have different policies regarding medical professionals as the Good Sam act is primarily designed to protect "lay persons" from legal consequences in attempt to save a life where lay persons once were hesitant to intervene with an acutely injured/ill person due to legal peril this increasing the survivability of victims of illness or injury in absence of EMS/Medical personnel. A good first aid/first responders course for your area of legal jurisdiction can explain further your areas of limitations in respect to lay person medical intervention to save lives. Generally and within "general reasoning", medical intervention to persons in immediate peril of dying carried broad relief for the lay person administering such interventions. Again, consult your local laws concerning the Good Samaritan Act.
Note: I am not a LAWYER nor do I play one on TV.... It is up to you to use what you know and have to SAVE A LIFE, unlike an off duty EMT, EMT-P, RT, RN, DO or MD that STOPS at the scene, you have NO LEGAL DUTY TO ACT, only measure your own MORAL DUTY to act against what you know, have available versus unreasonable, scene safety, etc. Further examples of an unreasonable act in addition to gross unreasonable intervention is to place you are a rescuer in harms way to effect a rescue where you become a second victim, i.e. running through traffic on a freeway to assist the injured, thus causing you to be struck by another vehicle and injuring the occupants, you have no legal relief to prevent that other car's occupants from suing you, or if one of the occupants die, you may very well face negligent manslaughter criminal charges as a "reasonable person would have not done so".
Sorry for the book, but there is NO cut and dry answer without explaining further. Again, knowledge is POWER, check your local laws concerning the Good Samaritan Act and have a reasonable head on your shoulders. I've done as best as I can to explain this to the very best of my understanding. I would hate to think someone here would die from allergic reaction to a bee sting where would be rescuers failed to act due to fear of law yet law is in place to legally protect the would be rescuer from legal peril due to acting to save life. Thus this long winded post.
On my part, INFORMED CONSENT directive, if you see ME down, and I have severe anaphylaxis and you have an Epi-Pen, STICK ME! I'll be glad you did, so will my kids.
Cindi:
Dennis, excellent, I liked your "book", hee, hee. You spent alot of time to respond to that post, and oh yep, yep, that is a good thing. Have the most wonderful and awesome of these days, Cindi
Davepeg:
Thank you for posting this important information. It should be a "must read" for all beekeepers!
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version