Analysis Of A Car Accident

Imagine being a paramedic and you just arrived on the scene of a car accident. The car accident involved a man, whose car was driven off the bridge and into a river. The male driver was unable to get out of the car and ended up drowning. On your initial examination of the man’s body, you determined he did not die immediately but attempted to escape the car. Soon his family arrived on site and the man, whom drowned, his wife approaches you, upset and asks you, “If her husband was killed instantly in a crash or did he suffer before he died?” You must decide how you will answer this tough question, rather to lie, defer to someone else, or not to lie to her. Based of Kant’s theories the conclusion is we should not lie to this woman about what happened to her husband but speak the truth to her about the matter.

The paramedic could make the statement that the man died on impact from the crash and that he did not feel a thing. The thinking behind this thought is how will she know if no one tells the woman what really happened. However, this may come back on the paramedic as most bodies that die in a car accident are given an autopsy and after their examination would be able to conclude what really happen. The coroner usually gives the family the details of what actually may have happened, even the hard parts of the cause of death. For instance, the coroner may tell the widow that the dead man, died from drowning and not on immediate impact. This not only looks bad on the paramedic, who told her that her husband died on impact. Worse yet, the lie being told could lead to a lawsuit against the agency the paramedic works for. This is proven in an article by Rinella on EMS.com that stated,