Extreme Necessity in Case of Harm during First Aid

In the course of the research, the author discovered 31 criminal cases considered by Russian courts resulting in a non-rehabilitating decision due to causing death when providing first aid. At the same time, this phenomenon is mostly unknown to domestic researchers. The purpose of the paper is the criminal law assessment of the first aid provision by non-professional subjects. To achieve this goal, the following tasks were set: to establish the possibility of the presence of an extreme necessity in the provision of first aid; to establish conditions under which causing harm in the provision of such assistance does not entail criminal liability; to make proposals for eliminating defects in law enforcement and improving Russian legislation. To achieve these tasks, the author applied formal legal, formal dogmatic and statistical methods, as well as a set of general philosophical methods, including analysis, synthesis, deduction and induction. As a result of the study, cases of inconsistency of judicial practice with the norms of the domestic criminal law on extreme necessity were identified. Contrary to the arguments of some courts, when harm is caused during first aid, there may be some extreme necessity, exceeding which does not entail criminal liability for causing harm. The conclusions of the study are that the Russian criminal law on extreme necessity corresponds to the tasks facing the legislator; the problem lies in the insufficient understanding of its provisions by the judges. The author made proposals for reforming related provisions of the criminal law on the basis of the legislation of Canada and the United States.

1. Alhanov N. M. Krajnyaya neobhodimost v teorii ugolovnogo prava // Vestnik sovremennyh issledovanij. — 2018. — № 12.11(27). — S. 21–23.

2. Antonov V. F. Krajnyaya neobhodimost v ugolovnom prave: monografiya. — M. : Yuniti-Dana, 2005. — 111 s.

3. Baulin Yu. V. Obstoyatelstva, isklyuchayushchie prestupnost deyaniya. — Harkov: Osnova, 1991. — 359 s.

4. Birkun A. A., Kosova E. A. Gotovnost naseleniya Kryma k provedeniyu serdechno-legochnoj reanimacii pri vnegospitalnoj ostanovke krovoobrashcheniya // Socialnye aspekty zdorovya naseleniya. — 2019. — № 1. — S. 5–5.

5. Bogdan I. V., Gurylina M. V., Chistyakova D. P. Znaniya i prakticheskij opyt naseleniya v voprosah okazaniya pervoj pomoshchi // Zdravoohranenie Rossijskoj Federacii. — 2020. — № 5. — S. 253–257.

6. Borisov S. V., Dmitrenko A. P., Russkevich E. A., Dajshutov M. M. Neobhodimaya oborona, krajnyaya neobhodimost, zaderzhanie prestupnika (pravovaya ocenka dejstvij sotrudnikov policii). — M. : Institut zakonodatelstva i sravnitelnogo pravovedeniya, 2012. — 189 s.

7. Botalov N. S., Nekrasova Yu. E., Chepkasova N. I. Teoreticheskij uroven znanij studentov medicinskogo vuza v voprosah serdechno-legochnoj reanimacii // Mezhdunarodnyj studencheskij nauchnyj vestnik. — 2018. — № 5. — S. 39–39.

8. Verhovodkina T. V., Kurzova B. I. Problemnye voprosy okazaniya pervoj pomoshchi v Respublike Belarus // Aktualnye problemy sovremennoj mediciny i farmacii — 2020 : sbornik materialov mezhdunarodnoj nauchnoprakticheskoj konferencii studentov i molodyh uchenyh BGMU. — Minsk, 2020. — S. 1156–1160.

9. Gerasimova E. V. Obstoyatelstva, isklyuchayushchie prestupnost deyaniya: neobhodimaya oborona, prichinenie vreda pri zaderzhanii lica, sovershivshego prestuplenie, krajnyaya neobhodimost: uchebnoprakticheskoe posobie. — Saratov: Vuzovskoe obrazovanie, 2018. — 150 s.

10. Dezhurnyj L. I., Shuvalova E. A., Lysenko K. I., Zakurdaeva A. Yu., Baturin D. I. Principy zashchity ot yuridicheskoj otvetstvennosti lic, okazyvayushchih pervuyu pomoshch postradavshim, v mezhdunarodnom i rossijskom zakonodatelstve // Menedzher zdravoohraneniya. — 2010. — № 6. — S. 34–40.

11. Domahin S. A. Krajnyaya neobhodimost po sovetskomu ugolovnomu pravu. — M., 1956. — 80 s.

12. Dorogin D. Obstoyatelstva, isklyuchayushchie ugolovnuyu otvetstvennost: pravovye pozicii sudebnyh organov. — M. : RGUP, 2017. — 229 s.

13. Duhovnik Yu. E. Oshibka v nalichii obstoyatelstv, isklyuchayushchih prestupnost deyaniya, v ugolovnom prave Respubliki Belarus i Rossijskoj Federacii: dis. … kand. yurid. nauk. — M., 2016. — 169 s.

14. Efimova M. E. Doklad «Pravovye voprosy okazaniya pervoj pomoshchi» // Oficialnyj sajt Nacionalnogo soveta po reanimacii. URL: https://www.rusnrc.com/--c4jn.

15. Zavidov B. D. Ob obstoyatelstvah, isklyuchayushchih prestupnost deyaniya (kommentarij k st. 38–42 UK RF) // SPS «KonsultantPlyus» (data obrashcheniya: 24.06.2021).

16. Zyabirov I. M., Zyabirov A. I., Naumov D. A. Yuridicheskaya otvetstvennost za neumyshlennoe prichinenie vreda zhizni i zdorovyu pri okazanii pervoj pomoshchi // Surskij vestnik. — 2020. — № 3. — S. 81–86.

17. Kirichenko V. F. Znachenie oshibki po sovetskomu ugolovnomu pravu. — M., 1952. — 96 s.

18. Kozak V. N. Voprosy teorii i praktiki krajnej neobhodimosti. — Saratov, 1981. — 154 s.

19. Koroleva I. V., Lebedeva E. G. Analiz znanij po okazaniyu pervoj medicinskoj pomoshchi u studentov i prepodavatelej na zanyatiyah fizicheskoj kulturoj v vuze // Tendencii razvitiya nauki i obrazovaniya. — 2019. — № 47-1. — S. 52–57.

20. Marenchuk Yu. A., Prasolova O. V., Prasolov D. E. Kompetentnost budushchih uchitelej v voprosah okazaniya pervoj pomoshchi postradavshim kak pokazatel kachestva obrazovaniya // Sovremennye problemy nauki i obrazovaniya. — 2020. — № 3. — S. 77.

21. Miroshnichenko A. G., Barsukova I. M., Kiselgof O. G. Pokazateli operativnosti raboty skoroj medicinskoj pomoshchi v Rossijskoj Federacii // Skoraya medicinskaya pomoshch. — 2013. — № 4. — S. 13–17.

22. Orekhov V. V. Neobhodimaya oborona i inye obstoyatelstva, isklyuchayushchie prestupnost deyaniya. — SPb. : Yuridicheskij centr-Press, 2003. — 230 s.

23. Oreshkina T. Yu.. Obstoyatelstva, isklyuchayushchie prestupnost deyaniya: uchebnoe posobie dlya magistrantov. — M. : Prospekt, 2016. — 112 s.

24. Petrov S. V., Talagaeva Yu. A. Nedostatki massovogo obucheniya okazaniyu pervoj pomoshchi // Ekoprofilaktika, ozdorovitelnye i sportivno-trenirovochnye tekhnologii: materialy II Mezhdunarodnoj nauchnoprakticheskoj konferencii, posvyashchennoj 85-letiyu Balashovskogo instituta (filiala) FGBOU VO «Saratovskij nacionalnyj issledovatelskij gosudarstvennyj universitet imeni N.G. Chernyshevskogo», g. Balashov, 20–21 fevralya 2018 g. / pod obshch. red. D. V. Vorobeva, N. V. Timushkinoj. — Saratov, 2018. — S. 488–495.

25. Pleshakov A. M., Shkabin G. S. Institut krajnej neobhodimosti v rossijskom ugolovnom prave. — M. : Yurlitinform, 2006. — 240 s.

26. Pleshkakov A. M., Shkabin G. S. Krajnyaya neobhodimost kak obstoyatelstvo, isklyuchayushchee prestupnost deyaniya: uchebnoe posobie. — Ryazan, 2005. — 72 s.

27. Popov A. N., Aistova L. S. Obekt prestupleniya. — SPb., 2014. — 40 s.

28. Porvanova E. D. Yuridicheskie aspekty provedeniya serdechno-legochnoj reanimacii v ramkah okazaniya pervoj dovrachebnoj pomoshchi // Forcipe. — 2019. — T. 2. — S. 226–226.

29. Smirnov A. M. [i dr.] Obstoyatelstva, isklyuchayushchie prestupnost deyaniya: ucheb. posobie dlya studentov vuzov, obuchayushchihsya po napravleniyu podgotovki «Yurisprudenciya». — M. : Yuniti-Dana: Zakon i pravo, 2016. — 166 s.

30. Stankevich A. M., Naumov V. V., Fomenko E. V. Predely pravomernosti krajnej neobhodimosti: monografiya. — Tula: Polinom, 2015. — 127 s.

31. Tomilina E. E., Opokin A. B. Osobennosti konstitucionno-pravovogo statusa lichnosti v pravovom gosudarstve // Aktualnye problemy gumanitarnyh i estestvennyh nauk. — 2015. — № 3-2. — S. 27–32.

32. Chin Suan Chyong. Obstoyatelstva, isklyuchayushchie prestupnost deyaniya, v ugolovnom prave Rossijskoj Federacii i Socialisticheskoj Respubliki Vetnam: dis. … kand. yurid. nauk. — M., 2019. — 175 s.

33. Al Haliq S. A. et al. Assessment on CPR Knowledge and AED Availability in Saudi Malls by Security Personnel: Public Safety Perspective // Journal of environmental and public health. — 2020.

34. Al-Turki Y. A. et al. Knowledge and attitudes towards cardiopulmonary resuscitation among university students in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia // Saudi med J. — 2008. — № 9. — P. 1306–1309.

35. Anto-Ocrah M. et al. Public knowledge and attitudes towards bystander cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) in Ghana, West Africa // International Journal of Emergency Medicine. — 2020. — № 1. — P. 1–12.

36. Banta-Green C. J. et al. Police officers’ and paramedics’ experiences with overdose and their knowledge and opinions of Washington State’s drug overdose—naloxone—Good Samaritan law // Journal of Urban Health. — 2013. — № 6. — P. 1102–1111.

37. Bossaert L. et al. Bystander cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest // Resuscitation. — 1989. — № 17. — P. 55–69.

38. Bradley S. M., Rea T. D. Improving bystander cardiopulmonary resuscitation // Current opinion in critical care. — 2011. — № 3. — P. 219–224.

39. Breckwoldt J., Schlösser S., Arntz H. R. What bystanders of out-of-hospital cardiac arrest really do: Quality of chest compressions and implications for outcome // Resuscitation. — 2012. — № 83. — P. 219–224.

40. Buschmann C. T., Tsokos M. Frequent and rare complications of resuscitation attempts // Intensive care medicine. — 2009. — № 3. — P. 397–404.

41. Bush C. M. et al. Pediatric injuries from cardiopulmonary resuscitation // Annals of emergency medicine. — 1996. — № 1. — P. 40–44.

42. Cheskes L. et al. Are Canadians more willing to provide chest-compression-only cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR)?: a nation-wide public survey // Canadian Journal of Emergency Medicine. — 2016. — № 4. — P. 253–263.

43. Deliliga A. et al. Cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) complications encountered in forensic autopsy cases // BMC: Emergency Medicine. — 2019. — № 1. — P. 1–7.

44. Ghrayeb F. A. et al. Knowledge and attitude of basic life support (BLS) among school teachers in Hebron, Palestine // International Journal of Research in Medical Sciences. — 2017. — № 6. — P. 2477–2482.

45. Good Samaritan Overdose Laws in North Carolina (public memo) // URL: https://sites.duke.edu/policylab/files/2019/10/Mange-Good-Samaritan-Laws-Memo.pdf (data obrashcheniya: 24.06.2021).

46. Gulam H., Devereux J. A brief primer on Good Samaritan law for health care professionals // Australian Health Abstract. — 2007. — № 3. — P. 478–482.

47. Hodson N. Regulatory justice following gross negligence manslaughter verdicts: Nurse/doctor differences // Nursing ethics. — 2020. — № 1. — P. 247–257.

48. Hussain Isma’eel S. N. et al. Out-of-hospital cardiopulmonary resuscitation: a position statement of the Lebanese Society of Cardiology and the Lebanese Society of Emergency Medicine // Cardiovascular diagnosis and therapy. — 2019. — № 6. — P. 609–612.

49. Kim M. J. et al. Chest injury following cardiopulmonary resuscitation: a prospective computed tomography evaluation // Resuscitation. — 2013. — № 3. — P. 361–364.

50. Lee M. J. et al. Influence of nationwide policy on citizens’ awareness and willingness to perform bystander cardiopulmonary resuscitation // Resuscitation. — 2013. — № 7. — P. 889–894.

51. Lee S. L. et al. Complications as a result of the Heimlich maneuver // Journal of Trauma and Acute Care Surgery. — 2009. — № 3. — P. 34–35.

52. McInnes M. Protecting the Good Samaritan: Defences for the Rescuer in Anglo-Canadian Criminal Law // Crim. LQ. — 1993. — № 36.

53. Menzies D. et al. Does the LUCAS device increase trauma during CPR? // Resuscitation. — 2008. — № 77.

54. Miller A. C. et al. A systematic review and pooled analysis of CPR-associated cardiovascular and thoracic injuries // Resuscitation. — 2014. — № 6. — P. 724–731.

55. Moallef S., Hayashi K. The effectiveness of drug-related Good Samaritan laws: a review of the literature // International Journal of Drug Policy. — 2021. — № 90. — P. 1–6.

56. Özbilgin Ş. et al. Evaluation of public awareness, knowledge and attitudes about cardiopulmonary resuscitation: report of İzmir // Turkish journal of anaesthesiology and reanimation. — 2015. — № 6. — P. 396–405.

57. Ram P. et al. Breaking your heart—a review on CPR-related injuries // The American journal of emergency medicine. — 2018. — № 5. — P. 838–842.

58. Shepherd B., Macpherson D., Edwards C. M. B. In-flight emergencies: playing the Good Samaritan // Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine. — 2006. — № 12. — P. 628–631.

59. Smekal D. et al. CPR-related injuries after manual or mechanical chest compressions with the LUCAS™ device: a multicentre study of victims after unsuccessful resuscitation // Resuscitation. — 2014. — № 12. — P. 1708–1712.

60. Urban J. et al. Current knowledge of and willingness to perform Hands-Only™ CPR in laypersons // Resuscitation. — 2013. — № 11. — P. 1574–1578.

61. Vacirca M. et al. P-36 Cardiopulmonary resuscitation outcome in Bologna in 1995: Urban and suburban area // Resuscitation. — 1996. — № 3. — P. 1574–1578.

62. Vural M. et al. Cardiopulmonary resuscitation knowledge among nursing students: a questionnaire study // Anatolian journal of cardiology. — 2017. — № 2. — P. 140–145.