Reply
Esteemed Contributor
Posts: 5,258
Registered: ‎03-10-2010

Re: EMT Suspended For Stopping To Try To Save Choking Girl


@NoelSeven wrote:

I can understand that rule, an EMT should not decide to make an ambulance patient wait. 

 

Sometimes a few minutes can mean death,

 

Everyone should learn the Heimlich.  Passers by should know it, as should the person who flagged down the EMT.


@NoelSeven

@Pearlee

 

THIS WAS A CODE BLUE!

 

Regardless of the training any Joe or Josephine on the street or in the school may or may not have not had, it is in the blood of MOST healthcare professionals to react to a Code Blue by making a beeline to the patient and render aid to maintain an airway and administer CPR until a Rescue unit arrives.

 

In this case, the person in the ambulance was a transfer and not in any distress.

 

The EMT did the right thing, since all the Joes and Josephines were so ill-trained as to be unable to provide the quality of care he EMT could provide.  I don't like saying it this way, but that's the way it started out with this post.

 

The sad part of this story is that the EMTs did not roll by 5 minutes previously, as the girl was already oxygen-deprived and is now in a coma and, I believe, close to being declared brain dead.

 

If this had been my daughter or granddaughter, I'd be kissing the feet of that EMT for his quick reaction and caring attitude.

Honored Contributor
Posts: 8,039
Registered: ‎03-10-2010

Re: EMT Suspended For Stopping To Try To Save Choking Girl


@Pearlee wrote:

@SydneyH wrote:

@Pearlee wrote:


Is he?  Where did you get that from? The article said he was suspended, it didn't say fired.  Please give your source.

 

The EMT also stated in the article - and I can't tell if this is merely his opinion or not - that the rule is for the company's insurance coverage.  So yes, it was to protect the company regarding liability.  The EMT made the decision that a child's life was worth more than a company's protection under its insurance policy.  Good for the EMT.


I only heard a brief conversation on the radio about the story.

 

@SydneyH   Then I invite you to read the link I posted in my first post on this thread.

 

 

 Legal analysts are not weighing the morality of his actions, there's a question of unrequested consent that leaves the company vunerable.  

 

The EMT's statement in the article then is correct. It's all about the company's insurance coverage.


 


Perhaps you missed it but this is a conversation not a dissertaion for a thesis.  I am recounting the conversation among professionals regarding the case.  Quite frankly, I don't know what the EMT thinks the basis of his suspension is, he could be recounting what he has been told.

Respected Contributor
Posts: 4,828
Registered: ‎03-09-2010

Re: EMT Suspended For Stopping To Try To Save Choking Girl


@sfnative wrote:

@NoelSeven wrote:

I can understand that rule, an EMT should not decide to make an ambulance patient wait. 

 

Sometimes a few minutes can mean death,

 

Everyone should learn the Heimlich.  Passers by should know it, as should the person who flagged down the EMT.


@NoelSeven

@Pearlee

 

THIS WAS A CODE BLUE!

 

Regardless of the training any Joe or Josephine on the street or in the school may or may not have not had, it is in the blood of MOST healthcare professionals to react to a Code Blue by making a beeline to the patient and render aid to maintain an airway and administer CPR until a Rescue unit arrives.

 

In this case, the person in the ambulance was a transfer and not in any distress.

 

The EMT did the right thing, since all the Joes and Josephines were so ill-trained as to be unable to provide the quality of care he EMT could provide.  I don't like saying it this way, but that's the way it started out with this post.

 

The sad part of this story is that the EMTs did not roll by 5 minutes previously, as the girl was already oxygen-deprived and is now in a coma and, I believe, close to being declared brain dead.

 

If this had been my daughter or granddaughter, I'd be kissing the feet of that EMT for his quick reaction and caring attitude.


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

ITA.  When did we lose our humanity to insurance companies. 

 

It could of been risky if the transport patient was urgent or in distress but it doesnt seem like they were.  He put a person first, kudos to him.  He can live with himself at least.  I hope it works out for him in his job or quickly gets another if it doesnt.

Honored Contributor
Posts: 37,847
Registered: ‎06-11-2011

Re: EMT Suspended For Stopping To Try To Save Choking Girl


@SydneyH wrote:

@Pearlee wrote:

@SydneyH wrote:

@Pearlee wrote:


Is he?  Where did you get that from? The article said he was suspended, it didn't say fired.  Please give your source.

 

The EMT also stated in the article - and I can't tell if this is merely his opinion or not - that the rule is for the company's insurance coverage.  So yes, it was to protect the company regarding liability.  The EMT made the decision that a child's life was worth more than a company's protection under its insurance policy.  Good for the EMT.


I only heard a brief conversation on the radio about the story.

 

@SydneyH   Then I invite you to read the link I posted in my first post on this thread.

 

 

 Legal analysts are not weighing the morality of his actions, there's a question of unrequested consent that leaves the company vunerable.  

 

The EMT's statement in the article then is correct. It's all about the company's insurance coverage.


 


Perhaps you missed it but this is a conversation not a dissertaion for a thesis.  I am recounting the conversation among professionals regarding the case.  Quite frankly, I don't know what the EMT thinks the basis of his suspension is, he could be recounting what he has been told.


Saving.

Esteemed Contributor
Posts: 6,457
Registered: ‎04-20-2013

Re: EMT Suspended For Stopping To Try To Save Choking Girl


@NoelSeven wrote:

@Greenhouse wrote:

@NoelSeven wrote:

@Pearlee wrote:

From the EMT's perspective, I'd rather get suspended or even fired and find another job, than live with the guilt of having driven by and the girl died when I may have been able to save her.   She sounds like she may not make it anyway, but at least the EMT did his best.  If he'd driven by and read later that she died, if he's a good person which it sounds like he is, he'd probably forever feel guilty about it.  

 

That's why I think he did the right thing - for both the girl and himself.


******************************

 

What would you think if the person inside the ambulance died because it didn't get to an ER in time... just minutes too late?

 

 


It was stated the ambulance person had a non-life threatening illness.  An EMT made a sound judgement based on knowledge of the patient in their care.  He had the skills to possibly save a young girl; I applaud him and would have done the same thing.  It is a moral decision but against protocol.  I am sure the EMT as stated rested better knowing he tried; he will get another job tho he broke protocol but if he told his story to me, a nurse, I would hire him in a nanosecond.  We have too many people in this world who turn a blind eye to those in need for fear of involvement or legal repercussions 


************************************

 

An EMT is not an MD.  As I already stated, I was the What If at one time, taken in for something the EMT did not realize was as serious as it was.

 

That's probably why the ambulance company has that rule.


Quite frankly, EMTs do a better job than most physicians during an emergency.  Many doctors haven't done CPR in years and many doctors can't read a basic EKG....EMTs are trained to respond accurately and promptly. The woman was stable and the other EMT was with him/her; it wasn't like he left the patient at the side of the road.  The ambulance patient was older and the child is young and needed the skills he had; he had the heart to help and he was right.  the rule is in place for litigation purposes not morality.  

Esteemed Contributor
Posts: 6,457
Registered: ‎04-20-2013

Re: EMT Suspended For Stopping To Try To Save Choking Girl


@SydneyH wrote:

He is not authorized to make those decisions, the company did the right thing imo.


The company was covering itself re litigation, nothing about caring for the ambulance patient. 

Esteemed Contributor
Posts: 6,457
Registered: ‎04-20-2013

Re: EMT Suspended For Stopping To Try To Save Choking Girl


@SydneyH wrote:

@Pearlee wrote:


Is he?  Where did you get that from? The article said he was suspended, it didn't say fired.  Please give your source.

 

The EMT also stated in the article - and I can't tell if this is merely his opinion or not - that the rule is for the company's insurance coverage.  So yes, it was to protect the company regarding liability.  The EMT made the decision that a child's life was worth more than a company's protection under its insurance policy.  Good for the EMT.


I only heard a brief conversation on the radio about the story.  Legal analysts are not weighing the morality of his actions, there's a question of unrequested consent that leaves the company vunerable.  


No lawyers never weigh morality...the EMT knew the risks but chose to try and save a child....

Trusted Contributor
Posts: 1,251
Registered: ‎11-24-2014

Re: EMT Suspended For Stopping To Try To Save Choking Girl

just read a follow up on my FB newsfeed about this story and the EMT was not sorry he stopped to help. He was suspended without pay and said he would do it again.

 

Of the 73 comments follwong the story, everyone has applauded him for his actions.  In this case, I would say I think breaking the rules was warranted and I would be glad to see more people put human life ahead of rules.  It's called using discretion and he did the right thing. 

I'm done with P.C. Just say what you mean and mean what you say. It's easier.
Valued Contributor
Posts: 947
Registered: ‎10-24-2015

Re: EMT Suspended For Stopping To Try To Save Choking Girl


@60sgirl wrote:

just read a follow up on my FB newsfeed about this story and the EMT was not sorry he stopped to help. He was suspended without pay and said he would do it again.

 

Of the 73 comments follwong the story, everyone has applauded him for his actions.  In this case, I would say I think breaking the rules was warranted and I would be glad to see more people put human life ahead of rules.  It's called using discretion and he did the right thing. 


 EXCELLENT post. ITA! I don't think he did ANYTHING wrong.

Honored Contributor
Posts: 13,953
Registered: ‎03-09-2010

Re: EMT Suspended For Stopping To Try To Save Choking Girl


@Greenhouse wrote:

@NoelSeven wrote:

@Greenhouse wrote:

@NoelSeven wrote:

@Pearlee wrote:

From the EMT's perspective, I'd rather get suspended or even fired and find another job, than live with the guilt of having driven by and the girl died when I may have been able to save her.   She sounds like she may not make it anyway, but at least the EMT did his best.  If he'd driven by and read later that she died, if he's a good person which it sounds like he is, he'd probably forever feel guilty about it.  

 

That's why I think he did the right thing - for both the girl and himself.


******************************

 

What would you think if the person inside the ambulance died because it didn't get to an ER in time... just minutes too late?

 

 


It was stated the ambulance person had a non-life threatening illness.  An EMT made a sound judgement based on knowledge of the patient in their care.  He had the skills to possibly save a young girl; I applaud him and would have done the same thing.  It is a moral decision but against protocol.  I am sure the EMT as stated rested better knowing he tried; he will get another job tho he broke protocol but if he told his story to me, a nurse, I would hire him in a nanosecond.  We have too many people in this world who turn a blind eye to those in need for fear of involvement or legal repercussions 


************************************

 

An EMT is not an MD.  As I already stated, I was the What If at one time, taken in for something the EMT did not realize was as serious as it was.

 

That's probably why the ambulance company has that rule.


Quite frankly, EMTs do a better job than most physicians during an emergency.  Many doctors haven't done CPR in years and many doctors can't read a basic EKG....EMTs are trained to respond accurately and promptly. The woman was stable and the other EMT was with him/her; it wasn't like he left the patient at the side of the road.  The ambulance patient was older and the child is young and needed the skills he had; he had the heart to help and he was right.  the rule is in place for litigation purposes not morality.  


**************************************

 

The reality is that the one EMT in my case DID NOT.

 

Don't know about your area, but mine has specially trained MDs for their ER  doctors.

 

The job of an ambulance EMT is to stay with her or his patient.  You and I disagree that the EMT can exit at will.  

 

You have no logical case.  No ambulance co.  would agree to that.

A Thrill Of Hope The Weary World Rejoices