Final answer:
To prove a claim of negligence against an EMT, it must be established that the EMT had a duty to act, failed to act according to the standard of care, and this failure was the proximate causation of harm. The patient's fear of bodily harm is not a required element to establish negligence.
Step-by-step explanation:
The question concerns the legal elements required to prove a claim of negligence against an Emergency Medical Technician (EMT). In the context of a negligence claim against an EMT, there are specific elements that need to be established: a duty to act, a breach of that duty, causation, and damages. However, the patient being in fear of bodily harm at the time of the incident is not one of these required elements.
To have a legitimate claim, it must be shown that the EMT had a duty to act towards the patient, the EMT failed to act according to the standard of care, which is a breach of duty, and that this failure was the proximate causation of the patient's injury. But merely being in fear does not establish negligence unless it is directly tied to the other elements of negligence.