First aid mythology

Can you carry out CPR on someone who potentially has a spinal injury? After all, if you're repeatedly pushing down on their chest directly above the spine then you could aggravate any injury. It could even result in paralysis for the patient. Fair point? It's a genuine question I've been asked several times.

Now let's look at this logically, what are the consequences of not carrying out CPR? If the patient is not breathing then quite soon they are going to die as the organs are starved of oxygen. I don't know about you, but death sounds like a far worse form of paralysis to me.

An article the Independent's website, based on a survey carried out by the British Red Cross, suggested that people are discouraged from learning first aid because they are scared of the consequences should they get it wrong. This fear is caused by the myths that exist about first aid, myths like the example given above.

I'm not a lawyer so it would be inappropriate for me to offer legal advice. In order to successfully be sued, I would guess that a patient must demonstrate that a first aider caused more harm than would otherwise have occurred. As the Independent article states, nobody has ever successfully been sued in the UK for carrying out first aid.

So would you sleep better at night knowing that you helped someone in need, potentially you saved a life? Or would you sleep better knowing that the patient's condition deteriorated but never mind, at least you did no wrong? Let's look at it the other way, wouldn't you want someone to help you out if you were ill or injured? Or would you be happy for everyone to walk on by?

Don't be put off by the myths, go to the St John Ambulance website now (or once you've finished reading this) and find out where and when the next course is. Learn to save a life, learn to be the difference.

First aid is such an easy skill to learn and like any form of learning, you build on it as your confidence and experience grows. That's not to say the patient's condition won't worsen, it may will do. As long as you act within your limits; as long as you have assessed the patient by examining them, questioning them and advising them; and as long as you feel confident you could justify your actions; it sounds to me like you have a fairly credible defence.

What kind of defence is doing nothing in case you get it wrong?