California top court hears defibrillator case
Source: AP
SAN FRANCISCO (AP) The California Supreme Court appeared reluctant Tuesday to require large retailers to keep a defibrillator in stores in case customers suffer cardiac arrest.
During arguments involving a lawsuit against Target in the death of a customer, Justice Marvin Baxter asked how a store clerk would know a customer was suffering cardiac arrest and whether the device could be inappropriately used and cause more harm to a shopper suffering another ailment.
"It may very well be that the good intentions could backfire and do more harm than good," Baxter said.
The six other justices on the court had similar concerns and tough questions for lawyers representing the family of 49-year-old Mary Ann Verdugo in a wrongful death lawsuit against Target.
Read more: http://bigstory.ap.org/article/california-top-court-decide-defibrillator-issue
NV Whino
(20,886 posts)You really want a minimum wage clerk using a defibrillator.
Liberal Veteran
(22,239 posts)Could be dysrhythmia. Could be low blood sugar.
bottomofthehill
(8,346 posts)It takes a minimum amount of training to use one as most ( I don't know of any actually) that will let you "shock" someone with a heart beat. They clearly do save lives. That said, Where do you draw the line of who would be required to have them. big box stores, CVS, grocery stores, mom and pop corner stores...? The odd thing is that I believe Target sells supplies for them, but will not put them in their store for the good of the public.
Thor_MN
(11,843 posts)The AEDs where I work, at least, have to go for professional service after being used. The battery has to checked/replaced/recharged. The pads and leads are disposable and the only other component other than the device itself. The pads/leads are replaced at the time of servicing, so there would be no demand for point of sale pads/leads.
bottomofthehill
(8,346 posts)And test pads. They carried other supplies but looks like they discontinued them
Thor_MN
(11,843 posts)If it does not detect an arrhythmia that defibrillation can help, it will do nothing. If the pads are improperly placed, it will do nothing. To suggest that "they "could cause more harm to a shopper suffering another ailment." is to be totally ignorant of their purpose and design.
That said, it would be good for all public places to have them, but insane to think that all places must have them. I have sympathy for the family's loss, but think their suit should be tossed. According to the logic of the suit, every business should have a full suite of emergency medical equipment on hand and trained employees in case someone should suffer a medical condition while on their premises.
It's not just heart attacks that would need to be treated. Allergic reactions, diabetic seizures, choking come to mind. It's unreasonable to expect businesses to be able to deal with all the possible emergencies their customers might have.
Unless things have changed since I worked in retail, I doubt clerks are even required to have CPR training.
Hawaii Hiker
(3,166 posts)At that point, only CPR can bring someone back...Usually V-FIB is first, then asystole rhythm, but there are instances when victim can go directly into asystole ie; pulmonary infaraction, etc
Thor_MN
(11,843 posts)No rhythm. no shock. Fail towards a safe mode.
McCamy Taylor
(19,240 posts)Makes just as much sense. Sometimes people die and there is nothing you can do. What if she had a heart attack in the street? Who would they sue?
McCamy Taylor
(19,240 posts)Does every nail salon need one? Does every coffee kiosk?