New law could see children taught how to stop ‘life-threatening bleeding’ after stabbings and car crashes
A Bill proposed by Conservative MP Neil Shastri-Hurst could add training in how to recognise and respond to life-threatening bleeding to school lessons. It would build on existing life-saving education such as CPR, with the aim of helping pupils act before emergency services arrive.
The legislation is due to be debated in Parliament on Friday and needs government support to pass. Shastri-Hurst says an ambulance takes about eight and a half minutes to arrive on average, while a person can bleed to death in four; he argues that early action could improve survival. The basic training, which he says takes 10 to 15 minutes, would teach people to apply pressure and, if needed, use a tourniquet.
- A proposed Bill would teach pupils how to respond to severe bleeding.
- The measure needs government backing to pass.
- Shastri-Hurst says basic training can take 10 to 15 minutes.
New here? Start with this
Severe bleeding can follow injuries such as stabbings and road crashes, and a person may need help before an ambulance arrives. First aid can include pressing firmly on a wound; in some cases, a tourniquet is used to reduce blood loss.
CPR, which helps keep blood and oxygen moving when someone’s heart stops, is already taught in some school settings. The proposed lessons would add training on serious bleeding, so pupils could learn how to respond while emergency services are on their way.
The Bill was proposed by Conservative MP Neil Shastri-Hurst, a member of Parliament who represents a constituency. For the change to become law, it would need to pass through Parliament and receive government support.
Both sides, in good faith
The strongest fair case each way — we don't pick a winner.
The case for
Teaching pupils to recognise severe bleeding and apply basic first aid could help save lives during the wait for emergency services, especially because the reported training is brief and builds on existing life-saving lessons. Supporters may see it as a practical way to equip young people to help in emergencies and strengthen public health education.
The case against
A case against adding this training to school lessons could focus on the limits of classroom instruction: pupils may not retain or feel able to use the skills under pressure, and tourniquet use in particular may require careful teaching. Schools also have limited curriculum time, so critics could argue that the case for a new requirement should be weighed against other priorities and whether the training can be delivered consistently.