Lone Star

From what I can see about the whole situation, it could be justified that based on patient's condition, there was no time to 'stay and play' on scene. This means that some of our treatments will be done enroute. Does this violate the patient's right to refuse treatment? I'd have to say, no. Working on the patient with implied consent, the decision to 'load and go' was essential to getting the patient to definitive care (which he desperately needed). In EMS, we have to be an advocate for our patient, and sometimes this means that we have to do things like this. Obviously the patient's condition demanded more aggressive treatment than we normally give in the field. Granted, Dwayne could have 'fixed him right up'; at least temporarily...but that's only a 'band-aid solution' to the underlying problem.

I remember watching that show when it was in its 'first run'....gawd I feel old!

The only 'problem' of where you live in the 'food chain' .....everything there is F-R-O-Z-E-N!

Happy Birthday CoHo!!

It has always been my understanding that the highest medical license is the one 'in charge' of a scene. This includes transport priorities. If a lower license level or non-medically trained driver thinks they can 'trump' the attendant's decision, they really need to rethink their position before it gets them into some serious trouble! Just as 'scene size up' doesn't end until you return to the station, the transport priority of the patient is still part of the scene. This continues until you transfer the care of the patient to the recieving facility. By our protocols, this includes a verbal and written report. As far as refusing to transport a patient, once you arrive on scene and start talking with your patient, you've made 'patient contact'. If you decide that you don't want to transport this patient, and you leave; you've just committed the sin of abandonment. RMA is a completely different duck. With this, the patient has decided that they don't want to be transported, after we've explained the possible ramifications of their decision. Do I think that losing one's job because they want to push for the 'cool factor' and endanger MY life, the life of my patient and put the general public at risk for unnecessarily using lights and sirens? Absolutely not. Lights and sirens are generally overused, and if they cause detriment to the patient's condition, losing your job should be the least of your concerns! As far as legal support for this position, I would check with state and local protocols. If there is nothing 'in statute', then it's time to talk to the state representative that covers your district for state inspections, etc

At least I'll still be able to do the yard work!

I'm not sure of the 'grades', but in a motorcycle wreck (a 70 year old man decided to throw his car in front of me as I hit 3rd gear), I was diagnosed with a 6mm separation of the left AC joint (I'm left handed too). I was put on a 5 pound weight restriction, and it's still in place, primarilly because I ran out of money to keep seeing the ortho specialist. I still have problems out of it, and right now, there's not much I can do.....aside from 400-600 mg ibuprophen q 6 hours, and alternating heat and cold for swelling. I try to use it 'normally', but there are days...... Is your range of motion limited?

Vent, One of the injuries I got in my motorcycle wreck a couple of years ago was a 6mm separation of the left AC joint. I wasn't able to afford to get it surgically repaired, and physical therapy did little more than keep it aggrivated. I would love to hear from you about the regemin that you're going through to strengthen your shoulders. By the time I hit 65, I'll probably start looking like the bionic man.....lets just hope it doesn't cost me $6,000,000.00 to rebuild me! Feel free to drop me a PM to discuss it. LS

How is this considered 'trolling'? Because I DARE to shoot holes in the constant whining and bitching about the 'mean old fire service sucking up all the EMS money just to justify their budgets and existance' arguement? You sir, need to pick one side of the fence and stay there! In this thread alone, I've seen you rallying against the fire department and then supporting it..... Not only that, but I thought this was a 'discussion', a place where other people's views could be expressed and at least considered; if not given merit? *Post edited for content and spelling*

Out of all the bitching and whining I hear from EMS about how "you can't do two jobs" and "bunker gear and bandages don't mix" or "Firefighters are too dumb to render quality patient care", I NEVER hear anyone bitching about how Law Enforcement is involved in EMS services? Do bullets and bandages work well together? Are Police Officers the 'exception to the rule' about not being able to do two jobs? Isn't the Law Enforcement responders sucking up 'EMS money' too? If Law Enforcement medics didn't respond, wouldn't that mean that the private carrier medics might have more calls? Oh wait, then there would be MORE room to bitch about being 'overworked'!

Oh great! Another fire bashing opportunity! Look people, haven't y'all beaten this dead horse ad nauseum yet? I LOVE the posts about the 'whining firefighters' when thats EXACTLY what you're doing! "Mean old FIRE is making unwilling EMS personnel fight fires to keep a job on a city department!" "That big bully Fire is taking all our money!" "The IAFF is putting out inflated/incorrect propaganda to make themselves look better!" The bottom line remains: Fire and EMS ARE intertwined, and in this tough economy, they will become inextricably intermarried. DEAL WITH IT! Until EMS decides to move away from MINIMAL training and education, it will NEVER be viewed as anything more than a 'job'! The same thing goes with all the different scopes of practice and all the title hungry whackers! Until EMS quits throwing it's little 'temper tantrums' and decides to step up to the plate like a 'big kid', NOTHING will change!

Timmy, Now you can take a couple deep breaths and rest your little fingers for a while! Good luck on getting into the paramedicine program. I've got one more quarter to do for my EMT-I, then I need to decide whether to move directly into the paramedics program, or do the core classes toward my Associates Degree. Either way, I WILL get that degree!

How much structural damage/smoke damage and flame damage was done when all those candles were lit? I'm pretty sure whoever brought the cake in from the kitchen after the candles were lit at least lost their eyebrows. I hope that they'll be out of the local burn unit soon!

How many portable propane torches did you go through to light them all?

Which textbook did you use? I have the feeling that I'll end up using the Brady textbooks when I get to the medic program.

Cap'n Gran'pa: Avast and ahoy ye scurvy landlubber! Hope you have a great birthday. Good thing Terri has the Fire Department on standby!

Dwayne, Just because you don't agree with my point of view, doesn't make it any less 'logical' or 'intelligent' than any point you do agree with. Whether or not this woman had an 'employment contract' to keep that dog alive is irrelevant. She was at the very least morally obligated as a pet owner to keep that dog alive, instead of baking it in the family sedan. Since she 'often took the dog to work with her', it's not like the dog being placed in her car was something new. I would also venture as far as to say that I'm pretty sure there was some sort of communication between her husband and herself about putting the dog into the car, or at least her intentions on taking the dog to work with her that day. While I can't show you specifically that she knew the dog was there, you by the same token, cannot prove that the husband placed the dog into the car without her knowledge. I can't see the husband just sneaking the dog into the car because he had nothing better to do, or wanted to set her up for something bad to happen. While I'm not a proponent of elevating domesticated animals to 'human status' (you'll never see me taking my pets to 'pet psychics' or setting up 'play dates' for them), I do passionately believe that as a pet owner it's your responsibility to keep them safe and healthy. I further believe that if you can't honor that responsibility, you don't need to have the little critters running around. If I did something like this, I would end up in jail on animal cruelty charges, no matter how much remorse I felt or showed, thanks to orgainizations like the SPCA. Just because she feels bad about what happened, shouldn't excuse her from getting charged just the same as I would. Agree with them or not, these are MY views; and I'm entitled to them!

My condolences to the family as well. Why is it that it was 'acceptable' to take shots at Michael Jackson when he died....there were also shots taken at the other 'big names' as well; but yet no one is supposed to take shots at a Kennedy? "Speak not ill of the dead" may be a 'good idea', but c'mon now....let's be real here!

Don't you think it was her JOB to keep that old dog safe? What she did was negligent and amounts to nothing more than animal cruelty. This is the same charge that Sgt Lovejoy was booked on.

This isn't a matter of whether she intended to do it or not. Not everyone that ends up baking the family pooch in their car INTENDS to do it, but yet they get more than a "go forth and sin no more" absolution based on how 'bad they feel about the incident'. What she did resulted out of NEGLIGENCE and nothing more. And just like every other negligent pet owner, she DESERVES the same penalties! There was a police officer that accidently left his k-9 partner in the car while he had dinner and took a half hour nap. This happened in Arizona a few months ago. From what I read in the article he was facing jail time for his negligence. Here's what that police officer faced as far as criminal charges: If convicted, Lovejoy faces up to six months in jail, more than $1,000 in fines, probation and prohibition from owning another animal. Whether or not he was actually convicted, charges WERE filed, he now has a criminal record and that's going to follow him for the rest of his life. This lady needs the SAME treatment! *edited for content*

That PROVES it! Beauty may come and go, but UGLY is forever!

It's not a matter of whether we weep more for the dog than we would over pork chops on the hoof. It's a matter of the whole issue that she pushed to elevate the domesticated animals to a status above the human. Then she ends up baking 'fido' because she took him/her/it to work with her. She worked for an organization that pushed for jail time on situations JUST LIKE THIS; and yet we're supposed to just 'look the other way' because of who she is? Just because she worked for the SPCA, doesn't give her a 'free pass' from the laws that affect everybody else. Neither will her 'feeling bad about it for the rest of her life'! She needs to face the SAME penalties that are imposed on any other schmuck that does this! Sheer 'domestication of the species' isn't why we're saying that these fanatics are elevating them to human levels and above....it's the 'puppy psychologists' and the 'doggie spas'....wardrobes, etc that brings us to this. As far as your 'bacon from the dog' analogy, there ARE some cultures where dog IS the 'main course'... How is holding her to the same rules and laws that we must abide by 'wrong'? As far as this being the 'silliest conversation you've ever participated in', look at the very 'silliness' you're putting into the conversation! Furthermore, it's not a matter of 'intent', but a matter of NEGLIGENCE on her part that contributed to the dog's death. There have been MANY cases where just negligence on the part of a pet owner has landed them in jail for a few years....why should she be any different?

Do you think this person would be or has been as 'forgiving' in other cases of animal neglect? Having read other news stories where something like this has happened, and seeing how the SPCA has pushed for jail time; why should this person get a 'free pass' because they 'feel absolutely devestated'? If it's acceptable for the 'average joe pet owner' to face jail time, I think they should also face jail time, regardless of how 'dedicated' they are to 'the cause'!

I've said it before, and I'll say it again.... AMR's biggest 'concern' isn't patient care, its the 'bottom dollar'. Why pull a person off a truck for something as 'silly' as a sexual abuse charge, when that truck can be out on the road, jumping calls and making the company money???