In the United Kingdom in some incidents people are dying in accidents, because no one is helping as there is no duty to act. Some people does not want to help with fear of getting sued after voluntary getting involved, in other situation there is health and safety rules which stops emergency worker from helping. However, there are statues and some situation under which a person has a duty to act and in breach of that duty will cause a person to be criminally liable.
There was an incident of a `ten year old boy drowning; while the police watched. `This does not set a good example for the general public. Police are expected to serve and protect when someone is in trouble or in a life threatening situation. That shows us that the legal position on the duty to assist those in need, in the United Kingdom is far from substantial.
One of the main reasons for them not helping is that they were `Police Community Support Officer`s` i.e. not police officers, that had sufficient `major incident training. ` Another reason for not helping the child; stated by Lord Young of Graffham ` because of health and safety concerns. ` Police were following health and safety rules given to them by their employer. They did what was expected of them in accordance with their job description. Similar types of health and safety rules were written in another article which states that `rules issued by one force, which state that an officer on the bank of a lake or river should not offer help to a struggling non-swimmer, raise fresh concerns over a "risk-averse culture" in the emergency services. Even a life belt must not be thrown without a "dynamic risk assessment" being carried out. Where possible, rescues should be left to other emergency services. `
In the U.K we do not have any act or rules which punish those who walk away situations when someone else is in deep peril. The phrase ‘love thy neighbour’ apparently does not apply to the U.K. But in Canadian Province of Ontario, Concept of...