Significant interprovincial project will benefit the profession of Paramedicine

[rock_shoes]

Now, if you mean that definition is that paramedics in Canada only work for EMS and should be the sole providers, then again, I would have to disagree as certainly many municipalities deliver EMS under a combined fire/EMS system. Winnipeg, as you mentioned is one, Red Deer, and Lightbridge also come to mind. We also have paramedic who work in the hospital setting. Please clarify.

Admittedly there are some combined Fire/EMS services in Canada. The fact that they currently exist is not an indication that they should continue to exist. If paramedicine is going to move forward and grow as a profession it must align itself more closely with the practices of other medical professions. I don’t hate firefighters. I’m good friends with a few of them in fact. If I had wanted to become a firefighter I would have gone to fire school. FRS friends of mine say much the same thing. If they had wanted to become a paramedic they would have gone to paramedic school.

Now onto the IAFF agenda. Their role, by definition should be to promote firefighting as a whole, is it not? What other agenda would they support? Yes, I will concede that fire's role is changing and with it they will be looking for new business, so to speak. It is a free country, and by all means there is no reason why they shouldn't proceed. Even if this means hurt feelings.

You are correct in saying that one of the IAFF’s roles is the promotion of firefighting as a whole. Where you’re incorrect is the assumption that pursuing EMS falls under the IAFF’s purview. Attempts to take over EMS are not being made to promote firefighting as a whole. Attempts to take over EMS are occurring because improvements in building codes have caused a decline in the number of FRS personnel required to cover a given area. The IAFF attempts to take over EMS operations directly violate the principles of union membership. They amount to an outright attack on members of other unions (for the most part in Canada).

Isn't EMS doing the same thing? Heck, we are not beating PAC up for advocating for the role of EMS are we? Wouldn't a congruent thought be how EMS is looking for new roles? Community paramedics, hospital based paramedics, injury prevention, and so on? What's the difference?

No, EMS is not doing the same thing. Paramedics are looking to expand their role into areas that currently don’t exist in most places. The original intent in the creation of paramedics was to make available to the public a healthcare provider capable of two important things; the provision of care at a scene outside of the hospital environment and the provision of care in transport.

[tniuqs]

'Jamie Hersey'

Is this the Mclean's article you are talking about:

http://www2.macleans...ed-by-the-bell/

Just so I know we are on the same page before I comment.

Until then I have a few other questions. First, I am not sure I follow your argument about us (Canada) have a clear definition of what a paramedic is. Do you mean from an educational, scope of practice, and training point of view? If so I disagree, as after all the main discussion of this forum how we should decide on that very definition. Now, if you mean that definition is that paramedics in Canada only work for EMS and should be the sole providers, then again, I would have to disagree as certainly many municipalities deliver EMS under a combined fire/EMS system. Winnipeg, as you mentioned is one, Red Deer, and Lightbridge also come to mind. We also have paramedic who work in the hospital setting. Please clarify.

Now onto the IAFF agenda. Their role, by definition should be to promote firefighting as a whole, is it not? What other agenda would they support? Yes, I will concede that fire's role is changing and with it they will be looking for new business, so to speak. It is a free country, and by all means there is no reason why they shouldn't proceed. Even if this means hurt feelings. Isn't EMS doing the same thing? Heck, we are not beating PAC up for advocating for the role of EMS are we? Wouldn't a congruent thought be how EMS is looking for new roles?

Community paramedics, hospital based paramedics, injury prevention, and so on? What's the difference?

I hope that helps clarify my point of view obviously your mileage and cost effectiveness may vary as I highly suspected pro FF/Medic.

cheers

<edit because of screwy quotes, punctuation.>

Edited February 12, 2010 by tniuqs

[tniuqs]

From another List Server ... PAC.

To whom it may concern:

Recent developments regarding the future of paramedic practice in Canada have given me reason to express a great deal of concern for the future of paramedicine. As I’m sure you are aware the Alberta College of Paramedics has been granted 1 million dollars via “Canada’s Economic Action Plan” to develop national standards and licensing/registration practices. I do not see this as a move in the right direction for Canadian paramedics and I find the PAC’s apparent absence from the process both bewildering and maddening. Current paramedic programs are CMA accredited based on NOCPs developed by the PAC. Leaving the group that sets current educational standards out of the loop like this is unacceptable.

With the foregoing in mind, I would like to offer any help I can provide to the PAC. Whether that takes the form of monetary support or simply spreading the message to other paramedics, I look forward to doing my part to progress the profession.

rock_shoes

BC Licensed PCP-IV

Alta. Registered EMT-A

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[Kiwiology]

First of all met me say I really admire the work Canada has done over the last decade; specifically Rob Theriaut, Mary Beth Gibbons and all the folks at the Ontario Ministry of Health, Canadian Medical Association and Paramedic Association of Canada. I think you guys have one of the best systems in the world and that you darn Kanuckistaniadians are a bloody smart bunch in putting together the NOCPs.

It was just the other day I was watching a webinar with Ben Maartman and Dave McLean (BC/AB respectively) who have become the unoffical "champions" of the AIT movement. They are talking about a "national" regulator and a "national" scope of practice, well hang on .... HMMMM I seem to recall Canada having a NATIONAL occupational competency profile .... maybe, just maybe that should fit the bill?

I must dubiously question the Alberta College of Paramedics' goals in putting together the "Alberta" comptency profile when a very, very comprehensive document exists in the "National" competency profile; thus creating a double standard, lets say Ontario creates one and maybe British Columbia too; then you have a quadrupile standard and before long we are calling you the United States!

While I am sure there a bunch of legislative and financial issues at play here I cannot comment on as I'm not familiar with the inherent structure of the Canadian system.

Looks to me to be another case of a bunch of jurisidictions (provinces in this case) wanting to stray from what should be an inherent national standard to ensure consistency.

Now if you ask me, and nobody did, should this whole kerfuffle not just be as simple as updating the NOCP? If Alberta and British Columbia want to let thier PCPs start an IV why shouldn't Ontario? Lord knows they have the education to back it up, in Ontario at least; can't speak for the rest of Canda, if Alberta lets people register who have not graduated from CMA accredited courses lord knows that Quebec and the Neuf's are up too.

Oh, and can somebody PLEEEEASE send me some mayple syrup eh?

[Jamie Hersey]

I also question why ACoP was chosen over PAC. Time will tell if they can get it right. From my point of view, if in the end, they do manage to set a national standard I will be happy. I still remember the days when it was easier to work abroad then, say, move between Alberta and BC for example. To qualify that I should point out that time the standards of training varied wildly across Canada.

The only other comment I have to make - and I will direct this at nobody in particular - is as a profession we should support our members who meet the standard to practice regardless of what setting they work in, or where they came from. To me it seems a bit narrow minded to say stuff like I support paramedics, unless they work for fire departments, or are foreign trained doctors, and so on. If I said women shouldn't be paramedics, or a certain ethnic background then people would be up in arms, yet if I make broad generalized statement that seems to pass as fair game. To me the latter is just as unacceptable as the former. If someone is trained as a paramedic, and is working as one, then by definition they are a member of our profession. They are just working in a different setting. After all we can't pick on one individual, just because we disagree with how they wish to practice, yet turn around and embrace other areas (hospital based medics & community medics, for example).

Cheers

Edited February 14, 2010 by Jamie Hersey

[tniuqs]

I also question why ACoP was chosen over PAC. Time will tell if they can get it right. From my point of view, if in the end, they do manage to set a national standard I will be happy. I still remember the days when it was easier to work abroad then, say, move between Alberta and BC for example. To qualify that I should point out that time the standards of training varied wildly across Canada.

The only other comment I have to make - and I will direct this at nobody in particular - is as a profession we should support our members who meet the standard to practice regardless of what setting they work in, or where they came from. To me it seems a bit narrow minded to say stuff like I support paramedics, unless they work for fire departments, or are foreign trained doctors, and so on. If I said women shouldn't be paramedics, or a certain ethnic background then people would be up in arms, yet if I make broad generalized statement that seems to pass as fair game. To me the latter is just as unacceptable as the former. If someone is trained as a paramedic, and is working as one, then by definition they are a member of our profession. They are just working in a different setting. After all we can't pick on one individual, just because we disagree with how they wish to practice, yet turn around and embrace other areas (hospital based medics & community medics, for example).

Cheers

[rock_shoes]

I also question why ACoP was chosen over PAC. Time will tell if they can get it right. From my point of view, if in the end, they do manage to set a national standard I will be happy. I still remember the days when it was easier to work abroad then, say, move between Alberta and BC for example. To qualify that I should point out that time the standards of training varied wildly across Canada.

I won’t be happy with just any old standard if it’s to be applied nationally. The only thing that will make me happy is if said national standard meets and exceeds the current NOCPs. Without that it’s a waste of time that will only serve to erode current standards. I haven’t seen anything truly progressive or even well researched thus far from ACoP and that truly concerns me. As Squint has already mentioned the current president is an EMR. WHY SHOULD WE TRUST AN AGENCY THAT HAS CHOSEN SOMEONE WITH A 120 HOUR FIRST AID COURSE TO MAKE DECISIONS WITH REGARD TO PARAMEDICINE THAT HAVE NATIONAL RAMIFICATIONS? I view that as being absolutely insane and I highly doubt anyone can come up with an explanation that will convince me otherwise.

The only other comment I have to make - and I will direct this at nobody in particular - is as a profession we should support our members who meet the standard to practice regardless of what setting they work in, or where they came from. To me it seems a bit narrow minded to say stuff like I support paramedics, unless they work for fire departments, or are foreign trained doctors, and so on. If I said women shouldn't be paramedics, or a certain ethnic background then people would be up in arms, yet if I make broad generalized statement that seems to pass as fair game. To me the latter is just as unacceptable as the former. If someone is trained as a paramedic, and is working as one, then by definition they are a member of our profession. They are just working in a different setting. After all we can't pick on one individual, just because we disagree with how they wish to practice, yet turn around and embrace other areas (hospital based medics & community medics, for example).

Cheers

I will support other paramedics no matter where they choose to practise provided they are professional in their actions and consistently strive to provide the best care possible. If a paramedic happens to work for a fire service then so be it. No one is likely to ever convince me that paramedic positions should exist within a fire service however. Attempts by the IAFF to take over EMS service have nothing to do with improving EMS. These attempts are part of an initiative to preserve FRS positions that would likely disappear otherwise.

Regards

[tniuqs]

Sirs/Madams:

I have been following the discussion on the listservers with the Alberta College of Parmedics announcement regarding the Federal Funding for the COPR initiative.

The $1.2M funding is the result of the collaboration of several Paramedic Regulators getting together and making application to the Federal Government to assist in meeting the challenge of the Agreement on Internal Trade and the document's chapter on Labour Mobility.

The funding targets three prinicpal areas:

the creation of common scopes of practice (national)

the creation of a national examination, and

the creation of a process to evaluate foreign Paramedic graduates.

[i want to qualify the above by stating that I am not privy to the contract details of the federal funding agreement]

I want to offer you the following information.

The Paramedic Association of Canada has been in meaningful discussion with representatives from the COPR on the use of the NOCP in the process of the development of a national examination. Currently, we are attempting to negotiate an agreement on how the two organizations can work together for the betterment of the profession in Canada. The PAC objective is that the NOCP becomes the official reference document for the national examination. We believe the NOCP would benefit from the support of the COPR as the NOCP is presented to the CMA as the new reference document for the purposes of their program accreditation process.

The Paramedic Association of Canada is absolutely committed to the National Occupational Competency Profile. We have revised the document over the past three years. We have incorporated the comments of Paramedics and several stakeholders into the revised document. The comments received through direct and indirect solicitation and face-to-face meetings with the Regulators have been included. Specifically, the Regulators reviewed the proposed document and offered a few changes which were accepted by the NOCP Review committee. We have been working together.

The Paramedic Association of Canada remains hopeful that the COPR makes use of the NOCP in the creation of a national examination. The existing NOCP (June 2001) has been approved by the PAC and has been accepted by the Canadian Medical Association (CMA) for the purposes of their educational program accreditation process. The existing NOCP is a 'best practice' document for the profession of Paramedic, nationally and internationally. The NOCP has been referenced across the world and acclaimed as both highly relevant and professionally structured to support the education of Paramedics and the practice of Paramedicine. The inclusion of 'performance environments' was groundbreaking for our profession and has been copied in several other professions. Arguably, the is no good reason not to use the PAC National Occupational Competency Profile as the reference for a national examination. We remain optimistic that the Regulators (and COPR) will find a way to come to an agreement with PAC. There is well over $2M invested in the NOCP. And, a significant portion of those monies are attributable to the support PAC received from the Federal Government in the late 1990's to create the document. The creation of a new document (profile) would be an unwise investment and misuse of public funds when a relevant document already exists.

Sincerely,

Pierre Poirier, Executive Director

Paramedic Association of Canada

Reproduced with the permission from PAC

[tniuqs]

I should casually mention that EMT City is a great venue to communicate and a most excellent means of blowing off steam the contributing membership do understand my flamboyant nature on occassion and sometimes gets the best of me with my passion for this Profession. I have authored to date more than 1800 posts that my on screen persona and yes frankly on occasions get's a bit snarly (I blame dustdevil for this)

The latitude to express oneself on this privately owed website is something we all have come to enjoy, as things out there in EMS land are not so seamless as we would like them to be.

So get to the point turnip !

My personal opinion changes substantially when I have positive realistic input and as a professional I try educate myself to current dynamic situations, situations do change and hence so should ones opinion based on that valuable shared information, as in Evidence based medicine applied. Some professionals forward tangible information to my queries and others prefer to use a rolled up newspaper on a puppy technique. This does not typically result in myself cowering in a corner like a beaten dog (just saying) many times the use of literary licence <medical terms applied> to draw attention topics that are very dear to my heart and are quite typically understood now intended to stimulate an open active constructive dialog. It has lately come to my attention that some readers / voyeurs are most seriously challenged by the concepts of figurative and the literal speech and lets not to forget the constitutional rights to freedom of thought and speech in America to that end I must state:

May GOD BLESS AMERICA !

I applaud RUFFUMS to recognize this, I was yanking his chain to get a response, I bring to the readers attention the term POSTAL that I have used prior in this thread and being a true pacifist no ill feelings intended. I am member of Amnesty International this a very successful "modus operandi/tool" has been implemented with great success in other campaigns yet unrelated to EMS, so POSTAL in my world means "writing letters" well enough said back to the thread.

cheers