DFIB

Welcome Jennifer, You should be able to enjoy the city. Indeed there are many characters,,, that have been working EMS for a long time. In some cases a very, very, very long time. Participate and enjoy.

No sweat happiness. I kinda figured you were talking about that other skinny guy.

Yea, 260 lbs. Duuuhhh. And absolutely 260/2 should be very reasonable.

I have no idea what this comment means, none. I am the OP and try not to use term like Lardo or Tubbo when referring to people even when they are disgustingly fat. What makes you think I am skinney?

Lardo and Tubbo is not representative of the group, only the individual poster.

Kiwi Here is your helper. http://youtu.be/AI2FIFY2Z6U I am simply saying that the fact that a person clames that the dog is their service animal does not mean he is trained.

A buddy of mine had one of those. Then she divorced him. But really who is the law of the land? The companies that supply animals or the ADA?

They require you to lift 360 lbs? What is that 210% your body weight? Was the test the same for everyone or where they just jacking with you?

Does being able to see or reach your penis count as "limiting a major life activity"?

The law does not require service dogs to be properly trained. That is a huge assumption on your part. "The ADA defines a service animal as any guide dog, signal dog, or other animal individually trained to provide assistance to an individual with a disability. If they meet this definition, animals are considered service animals under the ADA regardless of whether they have been licensed or certified by a state or local government." (http://www.ada.gov/qasrvc.htm)

Doesn't the Americans With Disabilities Act only require a "reasonable accommodation"? What would be a reasonable accomodation on an airplane?

The end all argument in this discussion is wither the blind guy has the right to take his dog versus the convenience to take his dog. Should EMS providers have to risk riding with an unfamiliar animal that has teeth and does not speak English to accommodate a patient? This is confusing for me. You have to accommodate all public places but in healthcare a person can be released from employment if their disability poses a "Direct Threat" “Direct threat” is defined as a significant risk of substantial harm to the individual or others in the workplace that cannot be reduced or eliminated through reasonable accommodation (taken from eeoc web page)... So what if the dog is perceived as a direct threat. What happens if I transport the dog and it bites me. I consequently stab it in the throat. Am I going to be liable for defending myself? Would the animal have the same rights as a person since I gave it "person status" by allowing it ti ride in my highly sophisticated, mobile emergency medicine unit? I mean once you factor in the "he stabbed my eyes in the throat" emotion does EMS worker stand a chance at a proper defense? The EEOC web page states that the animal is the owner’s responsibility and can be excluded at any time it becomes disruptive or violent. Do I just dump a dog with lots of valuable training of on the side of the road because it wanted to defend it's master from a perceived danger in the ambulance? Does the Americans With Disabilities Act specifically cover this scenario? Richard B you seem to be pretty involved in the disabilities world, What do you know that will enlighten us or help direct us to specific articles regarding service animals and ambulances?

A passenger of US airlines is forced to get up from his seat and stand for hours during flight. The safety devices designed for passenger use during takeoff and landing are not available for the passenger to use. He is forced to take off and land while improperly un restrained. The problem was not a major malfunction in the safety devices, It was a 400+ lb person using more than one seat he did not pay for. For me this is a situation that is totally unacceptable, a total disregard for safety and passenger rights. Why should a “normal” passenger be inconvenienced by the behemoth who decided to sit next to him? Why did the airline allow it? Who should we be an advocate for in this case? http://zeenews.india.com/entertainment/and-more/man-forced-to-stand-on-7-hour-flight-due-to-400-pound-fellow-traveller_100858.htm

Dwayne, So are you saying that the emotionally charged response to take the dog has nothing to do with the blind guy and everything about making us feel better about ourselves? That patient advocacy be damned so long as I can brag to my friends that I went out of my way to spare a pet separation anxiety? Or are you simply making a byzantine argument about the different feelings, sentiments and responsibilities that might or might not be involved in the service dog transport decision. The difference between duty to the patient and a counterfeit desire to conform to society’s standard regardless of the logic. In a society where feelings are glorified it may be an impossible argument. I think I hear you saying that transporting the dog is the right thing although the reasons for many might be wrong.

Fetal maternal stem cell transfer sounds like God takes care of mom. Pretty cool.

I only have some questions. 1. Is transport of a service dog required by law? 2. In this case it seems that the refusal to transport the dog delayed patient transport. What would the liability be? 3. In the case care could not be procured for the dog do medics have a responsibility to not leave the animal unattended? I would have taken the dog because I am emotional and humane although as per Dwayne it is obvious that the dogs usefulness is suspended till discharge from the hospital. The medics in the article should be kicked in the nuts for distressing a disabled marine regardless of their decision about the dog.

Have you ever read the crucible? If some dude wants to watch porn at work and I am aware but are not asked to participate, comment or observe I couldn't care less. I set a pretty high standard for myself but by no means try to enforce or expect similar behavior by others. I may consider their behavior, weird but if no rules are broken that I am required to report I will mind my own business. I also will not be a whistleblower to things that are insignificant. If I observe something inappropriate I think needs to be addressed. I will talk directly to the offender. I will tell them that I am required to report their behavior and will if they do not cease and desist. This does not apply for illegal or criminal behavior which must be reported to the appropriate authorities. If their behavior becomes a problem I talk to the boss. Life needs not be that complicated. If the dude is dumb or careless enough to let his behavior affect others or his job, then it is his responsibility, his problem. I am not the behavior police.

Next time your coworker smiles at you over their computer screen .... are you gonna have to wonder?

What you got against Mexico, Pale Face?

It seems that when you are a big shot you get a pass. http://www.khou.com/news/Can-Metro-CEO-George-Greanias-recover-from-computer-porn-incident-126430298.html

Amazing. The lack of intent seems to be contrary to due process. No wonder the world is screwed up.

Any person can claim harassment for any reason at any time and an employer can wrongfully fire an employee at any time. This being said, on reference to the OP, there are some factors that are missing in order for this to be harassment. Intent There is no intent. Unless I am missing something the offending employee had no intent of this particular woman finding said material. Intent is a key component in harassment. Vectorization. I am pretty sure this is not a legal term. The offense in question would have to be directed at the person in question to be considered harassment. If the offending act was inadvertent then it may be construed as a regulation or policy breach but not harassment. HLPP mentions the offended lady is very religious. This particular population segment often blow such things out of proportion. If she or her family is an important part of the community the offender is screwed no matter what their intent. Another point is that depending on the company laptops antivirus and popup blocker software, the offending employee may have properly closed down the porn site but caught a virus, worm or some other kind of cybernetic gonorrhea that reopened the same page or possibly a more alarming page as a promotion. There are a lot of factors here that continue to be unknown. I am not sure that under normal circumstances the person should be fired but it will depend on the local morays, how psycho the offended lady is and the influence she has to make management miserable. I would not consider this offense harrassment.

You never know the public is fickle. I wonder if it will work in ER triage? Probably not.

They should add it to every tone out. TuuuuuuEEEEEooooooo. 42 year old male complaining of chest pain and shortness of breath inside residence at 1567 Toadsuck Rd. Oh, and a unconscious stripper.

Unconscious stripper?!? Where?