Dáil debates

Wednesday, 7 December 2005

Good Samaritan Bill 2005: Second Stage (Resumed).

 

12:00 pm

Photo of Seán ArdaghSeán Ardagh (Dublin South Central, Fianna Fail)

The problem is that the wording is deficient. There is no clarity. Having said that, there is a need for some form of liability for good samaritans, particularly for the purpose for which Deputy Timmins originally intended the Bill, that defibrillators would be widely dispersed around GAA clubs and sport clubs and that people would use them on a voluntary basis. Again, one questions the need for a Bill at all because, as Deputy Timmins stated, there has not been a case in regard to this matter. One wonders if the introduction of legislation would invite litigation.

The Bill would be desirable in a workable form. There are a number of doctors in the House, one of whom is in the Chair, Deputy Cowley. Other doctors include Deputy Twomey, the Ceann Comhairle, Deputy O'Hanlon, Deputy Devins and Deputy Fitzpatrick.

Deputy Cowley may go to an accident, as may Deputy Fitzpatrick. If Deputy Cowley, as a doctor, takes action for the good of the patient, he is covered, but even though Deputy Fitzpatrick's medical expertise is equally competent, he is not covered if he receives reward for his intervention. An inequity therefore exists between the treatment of two equally competent and professional people in terms of the assistance they provide in emergencies.

It is welcome that Deputy Timmins introduced this matter for discussion and various parties within the House should address the matter on a less adversarial basis to ascertain whether some way exists to legislate for the sentiments expressed in the Bill.

Comments

No comments

Log in or join to post a public comment.