Volume 11, No. 54, October 19, 2006
Quicklinks
to Letters
Civvy first aid: your rights
Gonged not forgotten
Keeping DPCU smocks for Aussie para quals
Sticky situation
A mess kit dressing down
HOW
TO GET A LETTER PUBLISHED
Civvy first aid: your rightss
CAN somebody please outline what powers we have as trained Army personnel to render first aid to civilians in an emergency.
There are so many stories, such as if you render first aid in a civilian incident, the training the Army has given you won’t cover you in court as being competent in first aid if you are sued.
There are also stories of a civilian indemnity clause (good samaritan clause) that if we do render first aid and implications arise, because of the fact we did all in our power to help and that we believed it was in the person’s best interest, we are immune to civil legal action.
Can someone please put it down in black and white what powers we actually have, so everyone knows what they can do in a civilian emergency instead of being cautious to go in and help in a situation where they could save a life with their training.
Cpl T. Wiseman
4CER
Ringwood East Depot
Jennifer Woodward, Director of Advisings, Defence Legal, responds:
IT IS difficult to provide a simple answer to this question because different laws apply in different jurisdictions.
All States and Territories except Tasmania have “Good Samaritan laws” that will generally protect a medically qualified person when they render assistance in a medical emergency. Some states protect people who render assistance without medical qualification. If people need to know more detail they should read the relevant provisions of the various Acts:
ACT: Civil Law (Wrongs) Act 2002 – Section 5
Protects:
- any person acting without expectation of benefit, who comes to the aid of a person who is apparently injured, at risk of being injured or in need of emergency medical assistance; and
- a medically qualified person acting without expectation of payment or other consideration, and includes advice given by telephone or another form of telecommunication about the treatment of a person apparently injured, at risk of being injured or in need of emergency medical assistance.
Does not protect:
- if within the ambit of third-party compulsory motor vehicle insurance
- if the Samaritan is significantly impaired by a recreational drug.
NSW: Civil Liability Act 2002 – Section 57
Protects:
- any person acting in good faith, without expectation of payment or other reward, for assistance in an emergency to a person apparently injured or at risk of being injured.
Does not protect:
- if an intentional or negligent act or omission caused injury or risk of injury leading to the need for assistance,
- if the Samaritan was significantly impaired due to alcohol or a drug voluntarily consumed (whether or not consumed for medication),
- if the Samaritan failed to exercise reasonable care and skill; and
- if the Samaritan was impersonating a healthcare or emergency services worker or a police officer.
NT: Personal Injuries (Liabilities and Damages) Act 2003 – Section 8
Protects:
- a person acting without expectation of payment or consideration, in good faith and without recklessness, while giving emergency assistance to a person whose life or safety is endangered in a situation of emergency; and
- a medically qualified person for advice given in good faith and without recklessness, and without expectation of payment or consideration about the treatment of a person being given emergency medical assistance.
Qld: Law Reform Act 1995 – Section 16
Protects:
- a medical practitioner, nurse or other prescribed person for medical care, aid or assistance given in good faith, without gross negligence, without fee, reward or expectation of fee or reward, to an injured person in an emergency at, or near, the scene of the emergency, or while the injured person is being transported from the scene of the emergency to a hospital or another place with available adequate medical care.
Civil Liability Act, 2003 – Section 21
Protects:
- a person providing first aid or other aid or assistance to a person who is injured, apparently injured or at risk of injury, or a person who is suffering or apparently suffering from an illness; and
- a person giving aid or assistance while performing duties to enhance public safety and in circumstances of emergency, in good faith, without reckless disregard for the safety of the person in need of aid or assistance.
SA: Civil Liability Act 1936 – Section 74
Protects:
- any person, acting without expectation of payment or other consideration, coming to the aid of a person apparently in need of emergency assistance, in good faith, without recklessness in assisting the person in apparent need of emergency assistance; and
- a medically qualified person acting without expectation of payment or consideration, in good faith, without recklessness, including advice by telephone or some other form of telecommunication about the treatment of the person apparently in need of emergency medical assistance.
Does not protect:
- if [the injury falls] within the ambit of third-party compulsory motor vehicle insurance; and
- if the Samaritan is significantly impaired by alcohol or another recreational drug.
Vic: Wrongs Act 1958 – Section 31B
Protects:
- any person, acting without expectation of money or financial reward, providing assistance, advice or care, in good faith, at the scene of the emergency or accident, or providing advice by telephone or other means of communication to a person at the scene of the emergency or accident, in relation to an emergency or accident to the person at risk of, or apparently at risk of, death or injury (including prenatal injury, psychological or psychiatric injury, disease, and aggravation, acceleration or recurrence of an injury or disease), even if the emergency or accident is caused by an act or omission of the good Samaritan.
WA: Civil Liability Act 2002 – Section 5AD
Protects:
- any person assisting a person in apparent need of emergency assistance at the scene of an emergency, in good faith, without recklessness, and without expectation of payment or other consideration; and
- a medically qualified person assisting a person in apparent need of emergency assistance at the scene of an emergency, in good faith, without recklessness, and without expectation of payment or other consideration. Includes giving advice by any means of communicating at a distance: telephone, fax, email and radio.
Does not protect:
- if the person assisting is significantly impaired by self-induced intoxication by alcohol or drug or other intoxicating substance.
TOP
Gonged not forgotten
- LIKE so many, having recently contacted the Directorate of Honours and Awards regarding the delayed issue of my Iraq Campaign Medal prior to my entrance into the Victoria Police after 20 years service to the ADF, it is clear by their response that the “manufacturing delay” excuse is wearing thin.
Though politely informed by the gentleman answering my query that there was no way of advising me when I might receive the medal, I wondered if maybe I should have returned home on a naval ship to a PR greeting as they seemed to each be wearing the shiny new yellow medal. Personally, I don’t mind waiting in line, as I know there are many before me that are still waiting as well. It’s when the line gets jumped to suit the ADF’s PR opportunities that makes me shake my head.
WO2 W.S. Anderson
CSM Ausmed Det Balad, Iraq
4CSSB
Irene Wilson, Director Honours and Awards, responds:
NORMAL procedure is for the Directorate of Honours and Awards (DH&A) to process medal entitlements in the order that they are received.
However, circumstances arise when DH&A is required to re-prioritise the order. The award of Iraq medals to ships returning from the MEAO was one such case.
While this would not normally have been an issue, it clashed with a short supply of raw materials for the manufacture of the medals which, unfortunately, resulted in a delay in meeting demands as production could not be maintained.
However, DH&A advises that production and dispatch of the medal has now re-commenced, but there will be a backlog for a short period until production returns to full capacity. The directorate is working hard to reduce this backlog and will dispatch these awards as they are received from the manufacturer.
TOP
Keeping DPCU smocks for Aussie para quals
- LAST year I had the honour of being selected for Exercise Longlook. Over a period of four months I served with the 3 Bn Para Regt on exercise and on operations.
One exercise I undertook was a parachute insertion into Pisa, Italy and a subsequent exercise with 186 Regt, Folgore Bde based in Sienna. I was presented with both British and Italian parachute wings.
This is a ceremony that foreign armies do not take lightly as they consider it an honour to present their wings to you.
They were most disappointed and a little insulted when I had to inform them that I was not allowed to wear them on my para smock (as stated in ASOD Vol 2 Part 4, Chap 5 para 5.9).
Is it time to update the ASOD to acknowledge our maturity when it comes to working with coalition countries and allowing one set of foreign wings to be worn above the right breast pocket on the smock?
We are the only Army I know of that does not allow this: is it some kind of petty jealousy perhaps?
Sgt M. Rose
Assault Pioneer Section
SME
WO1 Jeff Hansen, RSM Ceremonial-Army, responds:
SGT Rose has correctly cited ASOD, Vol 2, Part 4, para 5.9 which states “Only Australian Army parachute badges are to be worn on Army uniforms”. Serial 8 to Table 5-1 of Part 4 shows that an embroidered black badge on DPCU background may be worn on the right sleeve of the parachute smock. The Australian Army proudly guards the right to wear only our skills badges on our uniform. I cannot comment on the author’s presumption that his hosts were disappointed and a little insulted when he informed them that he was not permitted to wear their badge on our uniform. I congratulate him on obeying ASOD in this circumstance, many before him have not. CA has no intent to amend ASOD to allow foreign badges to be worn on our uniform.
TOP
Sticky situation
ANY thoughts on having the khaki puggaree made with a small khaki velcro dot (or similar shape) backing on it?
From what I can gather, just about every unit/organisation has a colour patch. It seems a sensible idea to make the khaki puggaree with a velcro backing on it for simplicity, posting-wise.
Once you get the new patch, just get the required velcro bit from a shop and fix it to patch (can be easily glued), instead of mucking around with various ways of fixing patch to pugaree and often rendering the puggaree useless after changing patches, from personal experience.
For units without a colour patch, a pugaree that is mass produced is no problem as all would be uniform anyhow and, when required, a colour patch can be attached with ease.
WO1 Walter Meurant
Land Systems Division
Victoria Barracks, Melbourne
Lt-Col Jason Walk, SO1 Log Ops, AHQ, responds:
ARMY has implemented a method of simplifying the attachment of unit colour patches to puggarees.
All unit colour patches are now manufactured with an adhesive backing that is attached by ironing the patch on to the puggaree. This patch can be replaced at no expense to the member through submission of a Loss and Damage Report (SD016).
There is still a quantity of unit colour patches that do not have the adhesive backing. This is the result of units procuring a large quantity of patches before implementation of this design change, and these stocks are not yet depleted.
WO1 Meurant’s option has been considered, however the adhesive backing is preferred to the use of velcro.
The variety in dimensions of unit colour patches would necessitate a universal velcro backing that does not conform to the dimensions of all unit colour patches. This would leave a visible gap between the outer edges of a unit colour patch and the puggaree, detracting from the overall presentation of the uniform.
Furthermore, these unattached outer edges would be subject to bending and fraying, further detracting from overall presentation.
TOP
CA mess kit dressing down
I NOTED with interest the exceptionally bureaucratic answer provided by Lt-Col Walk to 2Lt Prino’s letter about acquisition of mess dress. Two points hit me. The lieutenant colonel did not answer the question why the contract for fitted uniforms was so non user-friendly. The response ensured that a presumably young and, being new to the organisation, probably impressionable junior officer has been given his first lesson in “that’s how it’s done around here”.
Little value was added to the discussion by the response provided in Army and no indication given that steps may be taken to resolve or alleviate the problem identified. Surely, the purpose of providing a response to letters is to improve the level of knowledge within the Army and to the readers on topics raised. It is incumbent on responders to provide reasonable responses and on the editorial staff to seek these responses, not accept space fillers.
Maj Dominic Nicholl
ADFWC
Gallipoli Barracks
TOP
|
