vs-eh? Posted February 21, 2007 Posted February 21, 2007 Yup, it had been about a year and a half... You must offer your opinion, regardless of your poll answer. If you select a poll opinion without an opinion it is worthless. I vote "Yes", for obvious reasons considering PCP(BLS) is a 2 year college diploma here. PCP is minimum to work on an ambulance.
medic0180 Posted February 21, 2007 Posted February 21, 2007 I voted yes because it would be a step towards getting more acknowledgement as "professionals" and not just "drivers."
vs-eh? Posted February 21, 2007 Author Posted February 21, 2007 I voted yes because it would be a step towards getting more acknowledgement as "professionals" and not just "drivers." Good stuff.
paramedicmike Posted February 21, 2007 Posted February 21, 2007 Yes. Two year diploma at a minimum. The expectation is that we're educated. A nine month paramedic program does not an educated provider make. That's not to say that there are graduates of nine month programs who aren't educated. But when it comes down to it, having the degree/diploma holds more weight. Like it or not, having a degree counts. It's the way things work in the world. And I know of no other profession so adamantly opposed to what will prove to be a benefit to all of us in the long run. -be safe
vs-eh? Posted February 21, 2007 Author Posted February 21, 2007 Yes. Two year diploma at a minimum. The expectation is that we're educated. A nine month paramedic program does not an educated provider make. That's not to say that there are graduates of nine month programs who aren't educated. But when it comes down to it, having the degree/diploma holds more weight. Like it or not, having a degree counts. It's the way things work in the world. And I know of no other profession so adamantly opposed to what will prove to be a benefit to all of us in the long run. -be safe Nice. Top-Gun-High-Five
Ridryder 911 Posted February 21, 2007 Posted February 21, 2007 I feel faint, but I have to agree with V.S. EH on this one!.. gasp.. !.. But, I feel there is more than to just having to have an associate degree or two years of Paramedic education. In reality, two years is the most any receive in the Paramedic curriculum, albeit 4 yr 2 yr etc.. The current scope really does not need much more than this.... but the main point in differential is the education backing up and along with the general sciences that make the Paramedic curriculum more relevant and can be taught more in-depth. I know many assume a 9 month program is the same as a two year program, but let's compare at a teaching angle. In the general paramedic class an instructor would have to spend an hour on A & P , then assessment, then treatment, then lab/simulation. Now, let's review a collegiate level A & P review 15 minutes, assessment review, treatment, lab/simulation. The additional half hour to hour could be spending time on practicing, more in depth discussion and possibly advance treatment. Additional studies could be assigned to students that have a higher level of reading and comprehension. Such studies as in detail physiology, additional studies in emergency medicine so a higher level of knowledge can be obtained. Anyone can not dispute a more in-depth course, better prepared students both academically and clinically is not better for patient care. R/r 911
Dustdevil Posted February 21, 2007 Posted February 21, 2007 Ya know, when I first came to EMT City, I was already convinced that a two-year education should be the mandated minimum standard for an EMS pratitioner. Times have changed. After 8 months of dealing with some real loser civilian paramedics out here, I am now leaning towards four years. Unfortunately, that isn't a choice in this poll. I don't know what to say to justify my choice that hasn't already been said. It's really a no brainer for anybody actually concerned with professionalism, and not just their own selfish agenda. Of course there are the mentally deficient who will argue that some communities could not afford that, but they are really doing nothing but illustrating their ignorance. Education cures ignorance.
vs-eh? Posted February 21, 2007 Author Posted February 21, 2007 It's really a no brainer for anybody actually concerned with professionalism, and not just their own selfish agenda. I find that funny, due to the fact the people preach about doing things "for the patient" when the are either ill equipped or educated to truly know anything about anything... I agree that people who want skills above education (the majority) are simply in it to look better for themselves and are not doing it for the patient. This is a theme that runs DEEP in EMS education and amoung EMS forums. An educated BLS provider with a lesser scope is VASTLY GREATER than an uneducated BLS provider with an advanced scope. Replace the "B" as you see fit...
BushyFromOz Posted February 21, 2007 Posted February 21, 2007 I vote yes... Aside fromt he above reason of which agree with (but dont have the field experience to go with that opinion, so it fairly hypocritical of myself) i base my opinion on what i believe is morally and ethically correct Besides, at the moment im feeling selfish and need to vindicate three years of school and 20K in fees i owe to the federal government - id hate to see what my opinion is next year when i start my bridging program for RN and post grad IC studies :shock:
BEorP Posted February 21, 2007 Posted February 21, 2007 Four years. (Now the bitching starts about it not taking four years to learn how to do the job. That's a fair argument, but education doesn't just mean knowing what you need to to do the job.)
Recommended Posts