In that fleeting instant, the world contracted to a single heartbeat of decision—whether to rush recklessly toward help or summon the steady hands of emergency aid. The stranger’s call for an ambulance was more than a phone call; it was a lifeline thrown into a sea of panic, a quiet act of courage amid the young boy’s tears and the frantic whispers of friends.
Yesterday, while at a local mall, I (28m) went to my car in the above-ground parking structure. I saw a group of teenagers, perhaps 14-16 years old, skateboarding. Suddenly, I heard a scream and saw one kid on the ground holding his leg, clearly injured badly—it appeared to be a broken leg.
I approached to help and offered to call an ambulance. The injured kid cried that his parents would be angry, and his friends insisted I should just drive him to the hospital, as it was only three blocks away.
I decided to call for an ambulance instead of driving him. While waiting, the friends continued to argue that driving would be better. The ambulance arrived about five minutes later.
After the kid was loaded, I gave my statement to the police, who also responded. The teens were still complaining that I made the parents incur debt, though I noted this is Canada, and ambulance rides are inexpensive here.
When I told my girlfriend about it later, she called me an asshole, saying I should have just driven the hurt kid since I had a car and it was the ‘right thing to do.’ I countered that ambulances exist, and as a total stranger, I did not want to risk him getting worse in my car and facing legal issues.
I am looking for outside perspective on whether I was wrong for not giving the kid a ride.
Conclusion
The original poster (OP) acted out of caution and adherence to responsible procedure by calling emergency services for a severely injured stranger, despite pressure from the injured teen and his friends to drive him directly to the hospital. This created a conflict between the OP’s desire to avoid personal liability and the immediate expectation of assistance from the bystanders.
Was the OP wrong for prioritizing personal safety and official medical protocol over the perceived convenience of a direct ride, especially when the alternative meant potentially increased liability or risk during transport? Should strangers intervene directly in medical emergencies involving unknown minors, or is immediate contact with official emergency responders always the correct course of action?
Here’s how people reacted:
I won’t blame the kids, as they were probably just freaking out and kids can be pretty irrational – especially when one of the friends is hurt
your girlfriend is kinda TA since she’s now blaming you saying you should have done the right thing – when you by far did the right thing.
I am going to guess that the EMTs immobilized the leg and transported him on a gurney. Do you have that kind of equipment in your car? Unless you are an EMT yourself, you could have easily hurt the kid more by transporting him.
If you were in the remote backcountry, then you would have transported him back to civilization.
Only because you live in a country with universal healthcare. But if you lived in the United States, YWBTA. Because that’s the sort of thing that could legitimately ruin a family financially.
Sad how pathetic American healthcare is.
NTA.
Medical pros were with the kid, and the cops have a statement. No crimes were committed or accused. Thus far, there are no losers here.
Calling an ambulance was the right choice. Putting an unknown minor in your car would have been a huge liability for you.