State-by-State Examination of Overdose Medical Amnesty Laws.

IF 0.3 4区 医学 Q3 LAW
Thomas E Griner, Sheryl Strasser, Catherine B Kemp, Heather Zesiger
{"title":"State-by-State Examination of Overdose Medical Amnesty Laws.","authors":"Thomas E Griner,&nbsp;Sheryl Strasser,&nbsp;Catherine B Kemp,&nbsp;Heather Zesiger","doi":"10.1080/01947648.2020.1819484","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Timely medical attention could decrease mortality following drug or alcohol overdose events, but overdose victims and witnesses often delay or fail to seek professional help because they fear police involvement. Statutes that provide immunity from criminal action can have an important impact on seeking timely treatment.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We systematically collected and reviewed medical amnesty laws (MALs; commonly known as \"Good Samaritan laws\") that are designed to encourage bystanders and others to contact authorities for assistance during overdose emergencies. Each law was coded to analyze (1) who receives statutory protections and under what circumstances; (2) what factors undercut the credibility of statutory protections; and (3) whether statutory language is easily attainable and understandable.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Forty-seven states plus the District of Columbia have MALs, but provisions differ widely in their scope of protection. Some laws may be less effective than others in prompting calls for professional assistance because they either lack protections, allow overly broad discretion, or prove difficult to research.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Some statutes may be ineffective in encouraging calls for professional assistance following overdose events. Narrow immunity provisions with complex language may not be easily understood by the general population.</p>","PeriodicalId":44014,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Legal Medicine","volume":"40 2","pages":"171-193"},"PeriodicalIF":0.3000,"publicationDate":"2020-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/01947648.2020.1819484","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Legal Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/01947648.2020.1819484","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: Timely medical attention could decrease mortality following drug or alcohol overdose events, but overdose victims and witnesses often delay or fail to seek professional help because they fear police involvement. Statutes that provide immunity from criminal action can have an important impact on seeking timely treatment.

Methods: We systematically collected and reviewed medical amnesty laws (MALs; commonly known as "Good Samaritan laws") that are designed to encourage bystanders and others to contact authorities for assistance during overdose emergencies. Each law was coded to analyze (1) who receives statutory protections and under what circumstances; (2) what factors undercut the credibility of statutory protections; and (3) whether statutory language is easily attainable and understandable.

Results: Forty-seven states plus the District of Columbia have MALs, but provisions differ widely in their scope of protection. Some laws may be less effective than others in prompting calls for professional assistance because they either lack protections, allow overly broad discretion, or prove difficult to research.

Conclusions: Some statutes may be ineffective in encouraging calls for professional assistance following overdose events. Narrow immunity provisions with complex language may not be easily understood by the general population.

各州对用药过量医疗大赦法的审查。
导言:及时的医疗护理可以降低药物或酒精过量事件后的死亡率,但过量的受害者和证人往往延迟或未能寻求专业帮助,因为他们害怕警察介入。提供刑事诉讼豁免的法规可对寻求及时治疗产生重要影响。方法:系统地收集和审查医疗大赦法(MALs);通常被称为“好撒玛利亚人法”),旨在鼓励旁观者和其他人在过量服用紧急情况下与当局联系寻求帮助。每条法律都被编码以分析(1)谁在什么情况下受到法定保护;(2)哪些因素削弱了法定保护的可信度;(3)法定语言是否易于获取和理解。结果:47个州加上哥伦比亚特区都有MALs,但规定的保护范围差别很大。有些法律在促使人们寻求专业协助方面可能不如其他法律有效,因为它们要么缺乏保护,要么允许过于宽泛的自由裁量权,要么证明很难进行研究。结论:在药物过量事件发生后,一些法规在鼓励寻求专业帮助方面可能是无效的。措辞复杂的狭义豁免条款可能不容易为一般民众所理解。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
3
期刊介绍: The Journal of Legal Medicine is the official quarterly publication of the American College of Legal Medicine (ACLM). Incorporated in 1960, the ACLM has among its objectives the fostering and encouragement of research and study in the field of legal medicine. The Journal of Legal Medicine is internationally circulated and includes articles and commentaries on topics of interest in legal medicine, health law and policy, professional liability, hospital law, food and drug law, medical legal research and education, the history of legal medicine, and a broad range of other related topics. Book review essays, featuring leading contributions to the field, are included in each issue.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信