How will DUI affect my chances of becoming a paramedic (CA)

[Just Plain Ruff]

Yes, but Ruff, in other professions if you are granted licensure (after you are even granted permission to take the classes) your license may be flagged with special notations. This will allow the employer to consider whether special monitoring may need to be in place as a condition of your employment.

I don't believe that many of us in the profession have a conviction on our records.

Agreed Vent, but I have a conviction of altering my driver's license when I was in college. By the persons post above who doesn't want to live in the OP's area, this poster should also not want to live in my area because I might just alter my trip reports.

How long do you hold someones stupid mistake over their head and not give them another chance?

If they pay their debt to society (I so hate that use of words) then why not give them a chance?

I have no problems with notations on their paramedic license or what not but the person I took offense to, made it sound like they would refuse them a license and their statement was something like "good luck finding a job other than ems" or some thing like that.

What happens if this person (OP) wants to help people, to fill a need in a community and then they are denied simply because of a stupid mistake they made 4 years ago or even 3 years ago.

It would be a different story if it involved conviction number 2 or three but one conviction is not enough in my book to banish them from EMS unless they killed someone in that drunk driving incident or there was a pattern to their behaviour.

But the old adage is, once a criminal always a criminal right?

[VentMedic]

I didn't make the "I'm glad I don't live in your area" remark. However, I do know the inconveniences of working with people who have convictions. It doesn't matter whether it is drugs or alcohol, if they hold a license they may be treated the same. Nurses and RRTs will have restriction on narcotics. In other words, rarely will they be allowed privileges without direct supervision and transport will be out of the question. This also goes for a Paramedic in our flight program. In some states, the Paramedic may also be required to work at the EMT level. This may stay on their record from 5 - 10 years depending on the state. Some may have a probation period as part of their licensing requirement which may include random drug and alcohol screening for up to 5 years. Again, this will vary from state to state and in California's case in the past, county to county.

RT schools and some nursing schools may not allow entry for 5 - 10 years after a misdemeanor DUI.

Unfortunately, not all EMS state agencies even run background checks. California is just now trying to impliment some statewide checking and reporting system in their very much county divided system.

I don't hold judgement against those convicted but there also should be a consistent oversight. Just being convicted once might also mean they were only caught once. Of course I'm not saying that for you or everyone but this is an annonymous forum. Sometimes people look here for validation of their actions. Many times they will find the support they are looking for but that may not mean the State and potential employers will hold the same views.

It is very easy to check with the state of California and then the county to find out the pros and cons. If the state is not going to grant a licensure for 5 or more years, then why worry about the employment issue until you can get a license. If the school abides by whatever rules the state has on the books, then you may have a problem. California is in the process of changing its rules so before making any assumptions, just check with the state office and go from there.

[mshow00]

What a totally arrogant and insulting post to the original poster and it took you only 6 posts to show how insensitive you really are.

wow, a stupid mistake 4 years ago and you decide on that alone that you are glad you don't live in his area. That's a little judgemental if you ask me.

Yes he made a huge mistake, did he not complete the mandated court requirements? But to throw a blanket statement of glad I'm not living in your area is a big bit of ego if you ask me.

So what about the other people in your area that got DUI's? Where are you going to live since I'll bet within 1/2 mile of your house and maybe next door someone has a drunk driving conviction.

Good luck finding someplace to live without someone with a drunk driving conviction.

I hope that your life has been without challenges or stupid mistakes. That would allow you to throw stones and be squeaky clean.

Sure we deal with drunks every day, we deal with the fatalities they cause. We deal with many other things yet someone who has made the mistake and then followed through on the court requirements and then want's to come out and help people and you automatically want to ban him from working in EMS.

HEAR! HEAR!

Now more on to reply to the OPs questions: I work for a company bought out by AMR last year, and we have had a couple of transferes already. One came from the East Coast with a bit of history he tried to keep quite. He apparently had a DUI (I don't know how old) but he was not allowed to drive for x amount of time. I say X because he did not fit in(peronality differences) and went back home.

[6Echo25]

HEAR! HEAR!

Now more on to reply to the OPs questions: I work for a company bought out by AMR last year, and we have had a couple of transferes already. One came from the East Coast with a bit of history he tried to keep quite. He apparently had a DUI (I don't know how old) but he was not allowed to drive for x amount of time. I say X because he did not fit in(peronality differences) and went back home.

I generally choose not to post in here so your cute little comment about 'status posts' really doesn't matter at all. Hey if we're letting in drunk drivers, why not serial killers and rapists?

Everyone has challenges and has made stupid mistakes, it's human nature. My mistakes I can assure you have not included driving drunk. So it brings me to comment on your comment about me being arrogant and insulting and having a big ego ... I've cleaned up after people like this guy and despite all the public education and information that's out there, people like him continue to make these stupid mistakes. I'm sure your tune would be different let's say if he had been pulled over in YOUR neighborhood while your kids were outside playing.

So hey, if that's the kind of person you'd want for a partner that's your problem, not mine. Fortunately for myself and my family and where I work, people are screened prior to entry level, education or employment- wise. So call me judgemental all day long if you so choose, I really could care less I'll just sit back and wait for all those posts now, telling me what a bad person I am for not forgiving Mr. DUI simply because he completed mandated court requirements. People are always calling for tougher penalties on crap like this ... until it's someone they know.

[Just Plain Ruff]

dude, we've all picked up after those drunk drivers you dislike so much. I'm not excusing his actions but are you so judgemental to not give someone a 2nd chance?

Your argument about serial killers and rapists is flimsy at best. Try to make a better argument next time.

I'm sorry if I upset you but your attitude towards this one guy and his one mistake shows that many people can't get beyond that one mistake.

I have no sympathy with anyone who goes out and drives drunk and then thinks that they can come in and start to work as a medic without some safeguards or a background check.

I'm sorry if my "cute" comment offended you but most people dont post that type of comment until it's been a while since they ahve been here.

Are you the kind of person who won't give anyone a 2nd chance? I hope not.

I am the type of person who will give someone a 2nd chance but if that 2nd chance becomes a need for a third chance then they are history. But to blanketly state that you are glad you don't live in that persons area is arrogant and condescending at the least.

I'm sure that there are people in your service or other services around you that have people with past convictions or other indiscretions and I'm sure they have proven to be good employees. Cannot guarantee that.

For those who have no sin can cast the first stone.

[Eydawn]

The position that someone with any DUI in their history should be excluded from positions of responsibility has merit, if one is only examining the offense and failing to take into account context at the time of the offense *and* the immediate context of the situation being presented.

No one will argue that DUI is one of the most deadly, stupid, selfish mistakes that a person can make- whether they actually kill someone or not (including themselves). No one in our field can argue that much of the distress and mayhem that we see could be avoided, had someone only made a better decision.

However, human beings have the capacity to learn and develop better judgment. And every individual, no matter how hard their effort to avoid making mistakes, will make a mistake at some point that is irrevocably stupid. We can only hope that the consequences of that decision apply only to the individual in question, rather than to innocent others. If you haven't made mistakes, welcome back, Jesus! (SARCASM! SARCASM! SARCASM! PLEASE DON'T DERAIL THE THREAD!) :wink:

Let us examine some hypothetical context that may have preceded the DUI incident. Perhaps someone hadn't had something to drink in quite a long time, and had underestimated their level of sobriety after imbibing. A perfectly honest mistake, and a fairly common one. Still a bad decision to drive? You bet. That shouldn't have happened, and is inexcusable. But unless every citizen vows never to drive after having even one drink in an evening, it will continue to happen. Should we only penalize those who happen to be caught?

Perhaps the individual was a repeat offender, a "this will never happen to me" sort of person, who really realized how ignorant they had been after being caught. Might indicate a higher level of stupidity than the other scenario; however, if the person learns from the experience, they may never repeat it. It is more likely to re-occur with this scenario however, since frequent drinkers often have a level of dependence that they are unaware of.

Now... it's been four years later. The person obviously is aware of the ramifications of their decisions. Should they be permanently excluded based on one catalogued offense? I say it depends on the context. If it was simply a single bad decision, with no evidence of multiple DUI incidences, then I believe the person has probably learned to *never* do that again, especially since it may exclude them from their chosen profession.

If it was one of a series, with luck aiding the person's escape from the police, I might suggest that they could display personality traits and other bits of history that would possibly exclude them from being hired...

Then again, I know an RN who seemed to BRAG about the DUI's of her youth... and she was indeed a poor practitioner, but unfortunately licensed.

It is not a cut and dry idea. For your own moral satisfaction, it may seem to be so, but fortunately courts of law and hiring panels don't operate on singular moral concepts of the world. If they did, it would be a very totalitarian experience...

To the OP: Don't do it again, and prove that you're a worthy candidate despite your past shortcomings. You also may consider working as a paramedic in a capacity that doesn't require you to drive... such as in an ED setting... until your record becomes clear to a satisfactory level for field employers. Good luck to you, and thanks for the honesty in your inquiry.

Wendy

CO EMT-B

[6Echo25]

He's not the first person to get a DUI and he won't be the last. How long do you hold a boneheaded move over his head? Forever? That's certainly your prerogative, but I think that's pretty extreme - convicted felons get more rhythm from most people. Don't expect me to believe that you've never done something stupid before.

Full Disclosure: I had a DUI over 10 years ago. I'm considerably less stupid now than I was then - at least when it comes to things like drinking and driving. Edit: And while I don't reflexively defend folks who drink and drive, if someone in their early-mid 20's gets one and it's more than 5 years old, I'm certainly more inclined to think they were just an idiot as opposed to a menace to society. (Although, I see after the fact that the OP was older than that.)

Like I said, watch the "oh you're so harsh" posts fly. Blah blah blah. Like I said (which people obviously haven't read), I've done stupid stuff before however have never been stupid enough to risk a DUI. Kudos to those who never killed anyone while doing it, you're of another "special group", and again, consider yourselves LUCKY.

... and again, glad I don't live in an area that allows people with past DUI's (don't care how long ago they were) to 'get through the gate'.

[Dustdevil]

I'm a pretty tolerant guy on past mistakes. Lord knows I've made mine. But DUI is more than just a crime or mistake. It's indicative of poor judgement and reckless disregard for others. If you hire one, and you end up in court over ANYTHING he does, this is going to be brought back up, and you're going to be made to look like a dumbass for hiring him in the first place. Five years. Ten years. Twenty years. Doesn't matter. The jury is going to say you should have known better than to hire him for a position of public trust, where mature and intelligent decision making is paramount to public safety. And, as an administrator for the agency, it is my job to look after the image and legal profile of that agency, not to provide a public jobs programme to rehabilitate criminals.

If you have an applicant that has been adjudicated guilty for any crime against a person or the public safety (altering your ID would not fall in that category, lol), you would be negligent to hire that person without seriously extenuating circumstances, like a pardon from the Governor or something. I hate to be that way, because I do not believe that all those people are bad people, or that they cannot be excellent employees. But again, that is not my concern. I'm an employer, not an unemployment counsellor.

[mshow00]

...The jury is going to say you should have known better than to hire him for a position of public trust, where mature and intelligent decision making is paramount to public safety. And, as an administrator for the agency, it is my job to look after the image and legal profile of that agency ...

Is that not what your lawyer is for, to point that this one infraction does not make him the spawn of Satan? And we all must remember that jurys are at best unpredictable. Besides we are all getting a little a head of ourselves here. Mr. OP I ask you, does the record show DUI? Did you get it "knocked down"? My guess you will have no trouble finding a job, however it may not be the one you want and it may hinder your advancement. Follow the advice given talk to those who control these things and learn what you may. I personally wish you the best luck, and hope you have learned your lesson.

[Dustdevil]

Is that not what your lawyer is for, to point that this one infraction does not make him the spawn of Satan?

Is not my job as an administrator to take whatever measures necessary to keep us from having to hire a lawyer?

A good administrator is pro-active, not reactive. Management 101.