1.1 The master of the ship is responsible for
medical care on board ships which have no doctor as part of the crew
(ILO Convention 164/9).
This responsibility includes making use of any existing
and relevant measures to provide the patient with the best possible
medical care:
- examination of the patient and assessment of the severity of the
medical incident
- providing first aid;
- getting medical advice by TMAS or calling for a doctor among the
passengers;
- providing medical facilities including the emergency medical kit
and performing medical care; and
- taking the operational decision in the light of the best medical
advice (care on board, ship diversion, medevac,..).
1.2 If there is a medical doctor among the passengers
he/she will be asked for advice by the ship’s master. When the
doctor agrees to intervene in the case, he/she will be responsible
for his/her own medical action. However, at any time, the master can
get telemedical advice from a TMAS either to confirm the passenger
doctor’s action or to help him/her in rendering the best possible
care. At all times, the captain should supervise the performance of
the treatment and be ready to provide assistance as required.
1.3 If there is no doctor on board, the master’s
responsibility can be shared with a remote doctor through TMAS. The
degree of responsibility/liability of the master/doctor would be determined
in the first instance by an assessment of how they fulfilled their
pre-established duties.
1.4 In relation to the kit itself, it is an obligation
on the master and the company (as defined in ISM Code)
to keep the emergency medical kit in good repair. If either neglected
to do so, both would be open to an action for damages in negligence/tort.
Assuming the kit is in good repair but something goes wrong with the
treatment given by the passenger doctor leading to physical injury
to or death of the patient, the passenger doctor might be liable if
he/she acted negligently. In assessing negligence the court would
ask whether the doctor acted reasonably in all circumstances of the
case. The emergency nature of the situation will be taken into account,
in assessing what was reasonable action on the doctor’s part.
1.5 The master or the company would not incur
liability merely by asking for the doctor’s assistance. Nor
would the master or the company normally be liable vicariously for
any negligence on the doctor’s part in treating the patient
– this is because the doctor in such a situation would not be
employed by the company nor could the doctor be regarded as acting
as the agent of the company.
1.6 However, in line with precedents in air transport,
it is recommended that the companies offer insurance or legal assistance
to cover cases where passengers qualified as doctors accept at the
request of the master to assist another passenger or a member of the
crew and take part of the responsibility on a voluntary basis.