The Assaults on Emergency Workers (Offences) Bill 2017–19 received Royal Assent on 13 September, after having successfully made its way through both Houses. Presented as a Private Member's Bill by Labour MP, Chris Bryant, to improve the protection of emergency workers, its receipt of ministerial support gave it the backing necessary to be cemented into law.
Current law: a need for change
It has not been considered a specific offence to assault emergency workers or NHS staff, with paramedics having to rely on legislation that covers common assault against members of the public if they are attacked. This lack of distinction between a member of the public and an emergency worker highlighted a glaring lack of support for emergency workers and emphasises their vulnerability at work. Violent attacks against ambulance staff have been on the rise, increasing by 34% between 2012/13 and 2016/17 (GMB, 2018a). Over the last 5 years, there have been over 14 000 physical assaults on ambulance staff (GMB, 2018b). There has also been increased sexual assaults on ambulance staff, with almost 700 reported over the last 5 years (GMB, 2018a). This marks a 211% increase.
‘Drugs or alcohol are not an excuse to get away with … a Common Assault nor have they ever been. You may wish to contact a duty sergeant … or look up complaints and discipline via your Police Service website. Obviously two sides to every story but It sounds like the age old excuse of a lazy copper “batting off” a job.’
Other offences apply to the assault of police, prison and immigration officers, such as common assault contrary to section 39 of the Criminal Justice Act 1998; and assault on a police constable, a prison officer or an immigration officer in execution of his duty under section 89(1) of the Police Act 1996; section 8 of the Prison Act 1952; and section 22 of the UK Borders Act 2007. However, even these are summary offences triable only in the magistrates courts, with a maximum sentence of 6 months. This is the same punishment as that found in common assault.
Until the bill takes effect, there is no statutory protection for emergency workers, but multiple separate offences and a non-statutory aggravating factor for offences committed against public sector workers.
It is not uncommon for paramedics to be exposed to bodily fluids through spitting or biting, particularly if a patient is reluctant to receive care or is under the influence of alcohol or other substances. Besides the obvious unpleasantness, there is a real risk of transmission of infectious diseases. However, there is nothing to compel an assailant to provide bodily samples for testing, to determine whether they carry an infectious disease, and if so, whether this may have been transmitted to the emergency worker.
‘Apart from the aforementioned responsibility regardless of intoxication, there should be clarity regarding the use of bodily fluids in an assault even if there is no known infection risk (I believe that is already covered). There should also be clarity regarding threats to kill and harm made to emergency operators/call handlers as they receive a huge amount of upsetting threats.’
Revisions to the law
New legislation will treat assault or battery of emergency workers as an ‘either way’ offence, meaning it can be tried as an indictable offence or a summary offence. Offences will be triable in either a magistrates court or a Crown court, with a maximum sentence of 12 months, or a fine, or both. It will also introduce a statutory aggravating factor for other forms of assault and related offences, such as actual bodily harm and grievous bodily harm.
It will give police powers to take samples of blood where an inspector has reasonable grounds for believing an emergency worker has been exposed to a risk of transmission of an infectious disease as a result of that assault. Unreasonably refusing to give a sample has become an offence punishable by a fine of up to £500.
‘…how can we “prove” the age old defence of the assailant was ill and didn't know what I was doing? I'm all for the bill as a paramedic we need this legislation. And I'm for body CCTV too but where do you stop?’
Implications for paramedics
By effectively doubling the maximum sentence available for assault or battery of an emergency worker, it is hoped that would-be assailants will be deterred from attacking ambulance staff. For those who do carry out assaults, their punishment will better reflect the severity of their offence. Similarly, having the courts consider other assaults and related offences as aggravated will result in more severe sentences within the maximum available penalties.
The intended effect of giving police powers to obtain blood samples is to reduce the number of occasions on which emergency service workers have to have blood tests themselves to check whether they have contracted infectious diseases as a result of an assault they suffered; take prophylactic medicines that are not necessary; and endure periods of uncertainty about whether they have an infectious disease and could be passing it on to others. This will ensure staff will not have to spend months feeling anxious they may have contracted a communicable disease.
‘If the assault was as a result of the person being under the influence, then they should be just as liable and accountable as if they were sober. They chose to take the illicit drug/alcohol and that's the potential results… If you speed excessively whilst driving, there is a chance of crashing and inflicting harm onto others… why is this any different?’
Conclusions
Introducing a new offence will not put a sudden end to assaults, and there is a lot more that could be done to protect emergency workers. However, it is a much welcomed change to legislation that will hopefully lead to fewer assaults.
‘There are multiple bills in the US making such actions a felony. Might be worth looking at. The big problem is that they are often poorly enforced by both police (no visible injury = no crime) and the courts (assault on video, still dismissed as exuberance of youth).’
Chris Bryant called the way emergency workers are treated a ‘national disgrace’ (BBC News, 2018), and the way many are treated while carrying out their jobs should not be tolerated. But for paramedics, along with other emergency workers, the service they provide is complicated.
In many cases, prosecutions are not brought against an assailant because they are a vulnerable patient suffering from a condition that makes them violent. This means paramedics are reluctant to press for a prosecution as they only want what's best for the patient. Hospitals might be reluctant to summon police for fear an account of the assault will be covered in the media. However, the majority of incidents never appear in the news, meaning they only affect the paramedics and their families. This will undoubtedly have a physical, psychological and emotional impact on the individuals involved.
‘Serious sentences should come into place instead of slaps on the wrist.’
Support for paramedics against assault is not merely a legislative issue, it's a workplace issue. Support from hospitals and ambulance trusts should therefore be a fundamental duty, maintaining order and securing the safety of staff and patients.
While the bill has now received royal assent, it is not yet an Act of Parliament. it is believed this will happen in November.