MemphisE34a Posted November 4, 2008 Posted November 4, 2008 Dude you have GOT to be kidding me. Yes, I was kidding in a way. It is true that they didn't ride the ambulance however. As I have already stated' date=' one should not have to be sacraficed for the other. If you lived here, would you be willing to live in a city that eliminated 75% of its fire stations - which would also reduce the amount of locations that ambulances would be responding from - and be satisfied with 20-25 minute response times for an engine or truck company? It is a joint service.[/quote'] I don't recall ever advocating the elimination of suppression resources. And since when do ambulances need fire stations to respond from? I guess you don't understand how budgets work. When you only have 100%, spending 75% on EMS would only leave 25% for Fire Supression. Considering 90% of our budget is salaries, that would equate into an elimination in fire service. You are correct, ambulances do not need fire stations to be able to operate. Working 24 hour shifts though, I guess you could consider it a perk. At least for time you are actually there.
MemphisE34a Posted November 4, 2008 Posted November 4, 2008 This guy can't get it through his head that ambulances don't have to have fire stations to survive. And who advocated elimination of 75% of the fire stations anyway. Trying to reason with this guy is futile. See the post above.
Mateo_1387 Posted November 4, 2008 Posted November 4, 2008 Maybe where you work. And just because they require a doctor does not need they need to be transported in an ambulance. Jeeze Dude, Memphis must be something special. Just because your patient could go by personal vehicle does not mean that paramedic evaluation/treatment/monitoring will never be beneficial. I cannot count on my hands and feet the number of patients that have had the most obscure BS looking symptoms that ended up being something serious. Plenty of people can benefit from a competent paramedic. Without education and experience, it can be difficult to know which patients are truly sick and may benefit from being at least monitored. You should respect what you do not know.
spenac Posted November 4, 2008 Posted November 4, 2008 Jeeze Dude, Memphis must be something special. Just because your patient could go by personal vehicle does not mean that paramedic evaluation/treatment/monitoring will never be beneficial. I cannot count on my hands and feet the number of patients that have had the most obscure BS looking symptoms that ended up being something serious. Plenty of people can benefit from a competent paramedic. Without education and experience, it can be difficult to know which patients are truly sick and may benefit from being at least monitored. You should respect what you do not know. I spent many years as a basic and as an intermediate. Now as I get more education I realize just how sick some patients that I called BS on really were. Now I am not saying that some calls are not just BS, in fact if you have read all my posts then you will know that I am a strong advocate of Paramedics being able to say no to patients that after an exam are found not to have an emergency that requires an ambulance. I am a strong advocate of doing away with all you call we haul systems. Having a properly educated Paramedic perform an evaluation, then if it is determined they can safely be transported to a doctor by other means then deny them. But to determine BS just by how it is dispatched is really pure ignorance. Sorry that I could not be nicer but that is .....................................................................
Dustdevil Posted November 4, 2008 Posted November 4, 2008 As I have already stated, one should not have to be sacraficed for the other. If you lived here, would you be willing to live in a city that eliminated 75% of its fire stations - which would also reduce the amount of locations that ambulances would be responding from - and be satisfied with 20-25 minute response times for an engine or truck company? It is a joint service. Well, sounds like they might need to cut back on parks, libraries, welfare and social services, Christmas decorations and July 4th parades to come up with some more money for essential services! Sure, fire would be cut back, and legitimately so. If it weren't for the EMS load, you simply would not need as many people to run only the fire load, even to do so safely. And if you guys go back to getting a full night's sleep most nights, you won't need as much money for salaries as you currently make either. So... get rid of the personnel who -- if it weren't for running the ambulances -- simply would not be needed. Cut the FF salaries down to what they are worth now that they are working 75 percent less than they were before, and viola! Big savings without closing a single fire station, or losing a single piece of suppression apparatus! And I can asssure you that this savings would be more than adequate to provide non-fire based EMS for the city. So what exactly is the downside again? This all comes back to what we've been saying from the beginning. The only reason you have the slightest interest in the provision of EMS is for your own selfish gain. And you have just proven that point better than any of us could have.
jbanagas Posted November 4, 2008 Posted November 4, 2008 And I wonder why it has remained as such after 40 years? Could it be because we have allowed people who are not cut out to be or have no interest in being medical professionals easy access to programs that assist in passing a test for a patch? The Memphis FD is not the first to do this and now will probably not be the last. What is being done in Memphis is no different from the many other FDs that have milled their own Paramedics. Your FD could have diverted the funding to contract the local college to extend its services and accommondate your needs also. You could also have offered EMS as a service separate for Fire to attract Paramedics who want to be "medical professionals". Unfortunately what you are doing does affect the rest of us as a profession. You seem to not understand the importance of a standardized educational process to boost the Paramedic into being a recognized medical profession across the United States as some of our neighboring countries have. Fortunately MFD is doing this wonderful program and keeping up with the standrds, private medics is no career, but firefighter/paramedic is outstanding, just like in Los Angeles, they have a similar program in Los Angeles County with a number of FD's, and as well in Orange County Ca. in fact no privated paramedics are allowed to run 911 calls within Orange County. Good for you MFD.
spenac Posted November 4, 2008 Posted November 4, 2008 Fortunately MFD is doing this wonderful program and keeping up with the standrds, private medics is no career, but firefighter/paramedic is outstanding, just like in Los Angeles, they have a similar program in Los Angeles County with a number of FD's, and as well in Orange County Ca. in fact no privated paramedics are allowed to run 911 calls within Orange County. Good for you MFD. Wow not that is some deep sarcasm I detect. I would be so insulted if my service was included in the same breath as LA.
Dustdevil Posted November 5, 2008 Posted November 5, 2008 Wow not that is some deep sarcasm I detect. I sure hope so! :shock:
WolfmanHarris Posted November 5, 2008 Posted November 5, 2008 Fortunately MFD is doing this wonderful program and keeping up with the standrds, private medics is no career, but firefighter/paramedic is outstanding, just like in Los Angeles, they have a similar program in Los Angeles County with a number of FD's, and as well in Orange County Ca. in fact no privated paramedics are allowed to run 911 calls within Orange County. Good for you MFD. Hey man, no one is knocking that FF/PMD isn't a sweet job if you can get it. Man if I could join one of those services in the states that run ALS engines with no transport. No offload delay, no transfers, lots of hands on the engine to help but not as much lifting. Good pay, benefits, 2-days on 5-days off, work as a contractor on the side for more big bucks, bask in public respect and enjoy the fruits of more than a century of hard fought gains by the unions. Sounds like great work if you can get it. Here's the problem, keeping these jobs is at the cost of allowing EMS to make its own gains and establish itself the way Fire did. Fire broke away from private insurance companies by the turn of the 10th century and found its feet as its own profession. It was free to increase its standards for training and equipment and in the process a mature well developed Fire-Rescue system was created. Just stick to that and let EMS do the same and break away from it's tangled roots to find its own place to grow. You're right, private EMS does not, as a rule do well by EMS either. But you may have noticed that no one here has argued that EMS was perfect and that Fire came along and broke it. What is being argued is that EMS is a the cusp of redefining itself, not by the toys we carry, or by cardiac arrests and MVC's, but as prehospital health care. For this to happen, the EMS system must shake off any factor that will prevent this. Whether this be a medicare/medicaid billing that discourages a service from exploring public health issues, prevention or other aspects of primary care. Or volunteer squads which keep us latched to decreased education standards and low pay and no benefits. Each provider model on its own has its problems, the patchwork of providers models only serve to bring these problems together and give us a system destined to stagnant, restrained by all these countervailing stakeholders. The upshot of all this is not, that Fire Departments are evil or that the individual providers are not doing the best they can at MFD. It's that as a system this combined provider model will plateau EMS right here. - Matt
MemphisE34a Posted November 5, 2008 Posted November 5, 2008 Well, sounds like they might need to cut back on parks, libraries, welfare and social services, Christmas decorations and July 4th parades to come up with some more money for essential services! Sure, fire would be cut back, and legitimately so. If it weren't for the EMS load, you simply would not need as many people to run only the fire load, even to do so safely. And if you guys go back to getting a full night's sleep most nights, you won't need as much money for salaries as you currently make either. So... get rid of the personnel who -- if it weren't for running the ambulances -- simply would not be needed. Cut the FF salaries down to what they are worth now that they are working 75 percent less than they were before, and viola! Big savings without closing a single fire station, or losing a single piece of suppression apparatus! And I can asssure you that this savings would be more than adequate to provide non-fire based EMS for the city. So what exactly is the downside again? This all comes back to what we've been saying from the beginning. The only reason you have the slightest interest in the provision of EMS is for your own selfish gain. And you have just proven that point better than any of us could have. I personally don't have anything to gain or lose from my department delivering EMS. I have been here long enough that my job is secure either way, at least as it would pertain to that. As far as firefighter salaries go, they are negotiated for the work done as firefighters. We are not paid a dime for being EMT's except when these personnel are detailed to actually work on an ambulance and then they receive a higher hourly wage. In fact, because I know it would make you all feel so warm and fuzzy inside, an EMT is paid $.01 cent an hour less than paramedics while they are working on the unit. I guess that will make you anti-union as well. Also, FYI there was a period recently that non-essential city services like the ones you described above were cut back or eliminated in order to maintain fire, police, and EMS services.
Recommended Posts