Alcomedicism Posted February 19, 2006 Posted February 19, 2006 1.) Lets not air other people's dirty laundry on this site. What happens on one site should stay on that site. 2.) Yes while I do agree sleepy doc was immature in her posts and rants what I want to know is who is supplying the alcohol. Besides I smell BS right from the start. How does she take full AP courses, work full-time to support herself, and take 3 nights of Paramedical courses. It just doesnt seem possible, and she has time to drink in all of this? Truth is many apartment complexes will not let you rent an apartment until your 21 due to their insurance policies, and those who are living on their own apartment at 18, Im willing to bet my bottom dollar that mom or dad probably signed the contract, the apartment is under the parents name but the child is paying part or all of the rent. Again what her living situation described is not possible in my mind. 3.) Please lets not discuss the "What should be the minimum age for EMS?" I think we've discussed that enough, everyone has their opinion, and many will not budge. So please lets move on and this thead needs to die of natural causes. 4.) I think its that time of year where life is so hectic it begins to bleed out over the internet, lets all throw back a shot and call it good. Alco
Burnzonemt Posted February 19, 2006 Posted February 19, 2006 I agree that it's not an ethical question, and that the age when someone really should be able to be an EMT really depends on the individual. But I hear a lot of people in this thread saying that 18 is not old enough to be a medic, so I'm just curious what minimum age requirement they would support for both EMT and medic certification. Hasn't this been discussed before? Beating a dead horse does get old after a while Here's a recent topic on this issue http://www.emtcity.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=3369
Asysin2leads Posted February 19, 2006 Author Posted February 19, 2006 Wow, thanks for the feedback. Actually I just posted it here because they closed the thread and I have a bit of a problem letting things go, I need validation, its a a real problem, they're going to up my Prozac soon. I really don't know what capacity this young lady is involved in Fire/EMS, but I do know she does make some key mistakes in her posts that are very telling. I think you would be very hard pressed to find a situation where entering an involved structure unprotected will make much of a difference before the arrival of the first equipped fire unit, unless you're out in the complete boonies. Every firefighter in the world I think knows you don't go in unless you have your gear and your team behind you. In the movies you rush in and grab the five year old. In real life you rush in, take one breath of superheated gases, and then die. And yes, it can be argued back and forth, but in my realm of ethics and morals in prehospital care, to honor the trust that is placed on you, the trust of the families who count on you, the trust of the doctors who's license you are working under, and the trust of the coworkers who you are leading, you do need to hold yourself to the highest standards, and for me, even if its harmless, knowingly and willfully breaking the law so you can have a Superbowl party does not run along those lines.
Charlie 3 Posted February 19, 2006 Posted February 19, 2006 Hasn't this been discussed before? Beating a dead horse does get old after a while Here's a recent topic on this issue http://www.emtcity.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=3369 :oops: Sorry, I missed that one.
Dustdevil Posted February 19, 2006 Posted February 19, 2006 I DARE one of you to say that Martin Luther King Jr. was acting in an unethical manner because he broke a few laws. I'll say it and stand by it. Both unethical and immoral. Had he lived much longer, he would have been exposed for the charlatan he was. Luckily, his death spared him the disgrace. So anyhow, I am disappointed that everybody seems to have ignored the obvious question. Is that chick hott?
Asysin2leads Posted February 19, 2006 Author Posted February 19, 2006 Generally hot chicks don't need to be heroes. It's only the ugly ones that have so much to prove. Everyone already likes the pretty ones. Anyone want to disagree with that?
UMSTUDENT Posted February 19, 2006 Posted February 19, 2006 I'll say it and stand by it. Both unethical and immoral. Had he lived much longer, he would have been exposed for the charlatan he was. Luckily, his death spared him the disgrace. So anyhow, I am disappointed that everybody seems to have ignored the obvious question. Is that chick hott? Do explain. Outside of the supposed affairs and conspiracy theories. Remember that you're from the south so it may be important that you qualify your statements. I'd like to see the other, devious side of Martin Luther King Jr. that you talk about. I'm seriously not being a smart ass either.
Dustdevil Posted February 19, 2006 Posted February 19, 2006 Generally hot chicks don't need to be heroes. It's only the ugly ones that have so much to prove. Everyone already likes the pretty ones. Anyone want to disagree with that? Nah... you're right. I'm just the eternal optimist. :?
xselerate Posted February 19, 2006 Posted February 19, 2006 Do explain. Outside of the supposed affairs and conspiracy theories. Remember that you're from the south so it may be important that you qualify your statements. I'd like to see the other, devious side of Martin Luther King Jr. that you talk about. I'm seriously not being a smart ass either. Although I can't claim to be an expert on the matter I have to agree with Dustdevil on the simple premise that everything wonderful written about MLK in history logically must have an equal and opposite side that is conveniently left out of history. And I find it completely ridiculous that you think Dustdevil would have to qualify his statements simple because he is from the south. Who is acting in an unethical manner now UMSTUDENT??
UMSTUDENT Posted February 19, 2006 Posted February 19, 2006 Although I can't claim to be an expert on the matter I have to agree with Dustdevil on the simple premise that everything wonderful written about MLK in history logically must have an equal and opposite side that is conveniently left out of history. And I find it completely ridiculous that you think Dustdevil would have to qualify his statements simple because he is from the south. Who is acting in an unethical manner now UMSTUDENT?? Not me. It's no secret that the south is still heavily racist, especially in the largest of cities. Hell the majority of rural America, north or south, is still heavily racist. I'm not implying that Dust is neccesarily racist, but that his statements as a result of his location must be made with that in mind. If you don't believe the above statement then you're simply blind. You too, need to take an ethics class since you obviously can't determine what is neccesarily "unethical."
Recommended Posts