Should Good Samaritans be protected?

Intervening in an emergency can do more harm than good. The law should reflect that

What level of legal protection should be afforded to bystanders who help those in peril? Pawan Singh / The National

Helping in an emergency is a basic instinct, but what happens when good intentions bump up against the law? For Mohammed Al Nuaimi, an 18-year-old Emirati who helped drag four young women out of their overturned car in Al Ain last month, his urge to help was balanced by discovering he was breaking the law.

Not immediately alerting the police about an accident and rendering help without being trained in first aid are both offences. There are some good reasons for these rules: enthusiastic but untrained bystanders can make matters worse. If one of the women in the upturned car had spinal injuries, for example, intervention by bystanders might have exacerbated her injuries. But in rural areas, it might take a long time for an ambulance to attend, and if the car had caught fire, worse might have occurred before help arrived.

Mr Al Nuaimi's case is being cited by lawyers to show the need for a Good Samaritan law. Another example where it could be used was the case of three Abu Dhabi veterinarians last year who performed CPR on a man who had a heart attack outside a vet's office in Khalidiya. The ambulance took 20 minutes to arrive, so their swift intervention broke the law but undoubtedly saved the man's life.

Many societies have sought to resolve this conundrum legislatively. In the highly litigious environment of the US, for example, many states have enacted laws to prevent off-duty doctors from being sued for intervening when they encounter an accident. But these laws are designed for those with advanced medical training and do not extend to the general populace. Other jurisdictions have sought to lower the duty of care in emergency situations, so that an untrained bystander is not expected to act to the same standard as a trained ambulance officer but is still required to act with prudence and care to avoid causing even worse harm.

The common-sense solution would be to acknowledge both the risks and advantages of bystanders helping those in peril. While most will sympathise with the desire to help when confronted with an emergency, a case-by-case assessment would be more sensible than a Good Samaritan law that would provide carte blanche for intervention. Even when the desire to help is not matched by ability, the punishment for anyone doing harm while genuinely trying to do good ought not to be onerous.