maverick56

I was a freshman in college, a PVT just out of basic and a new ROTC cadet. I'd been up for a few hours already for PT and work and was heading to my first class of the day. When I walked into the mechanical engineering building there was a crowd in the lobby massing under the tv's that usually had announcements and campus bookstore ads on them. Took me a minute to gather what was going on, everyone was silent and in shock. Not really sure what my first thought was, other than "is this real?" Then it seemed like everyone was looking at me (I was in uniform) expecting... something. I remember it taking forever to be able to call home because the campus phone system was overloaded. My mom was really freaked out, even more so because I was new to the Army and she wasn't thrilled with the idea and I was far from home.

We were on high alert for a couple weeks after that with contingency plans for multiple attacks on the school. At the time, my school had multiple classified government/DoD research projects on campus and we were a legitimate target for the region. Also the town is the main shipping thoroughfare for the western Great Lakes, so we had to coordinate with the Coast Guard. It was intense and surreal. None of us knew what to expect and there was already talk of possibly being mobilized. That was terrifying at 18 and green as can be. And I was still expected to attend classes and do my homework as normal - surreal. As for what I thought it meant, I knew we were at war. I knew I would be doing something and my life would change forever, it was just a matter of when and where. I was in Iraq 3yrs later.

My main goal is to become a paramedic. My other goal is to use my last 2 years wisely and possibly put it to good use and possibly enjoy it if I can. If I stay where I am, it wont be the case. The company is on a downhill slope. Poor decisions during deployment, a soldier suicide, and habitually poor leadership. Being an MP was a bad decision in the first place and I shouldnt have signed the contract if I had to choose and MOS that wasnt my initial choice (68W). Its damage control at this point. My perception of the Army is blemished by this company and I am stuck between staying and sticking it out and do civilian EMS or extend for a year to reclass with hopes that it will be a turn for the best. I dont mean to complain but the issues are variables that influence the decision making process. Just the facts.

Thanks

MP-EMT22

If I were you, I'd be looking for PCS opportunities vs. reclassing at this stage. I spent almost 7yrs as a 68W and am now in paramedic school. Though my experience is definitely helpful, it's more in the way of confidence, critical thinking skills, situational awareness and handling pressure than medical expertise. I've had a LOT to learn when it comes to civilian medical practice. I could see if you were to be assigned to a medical unit in a clinical setting where you might get a little more paramedic-prep knowledge, but as a field medic... I know trauma, I know mass cas, I know oh-shit situations and I know basic preventatives. This hasn't given me any advantage over my classmates when it comes to working an MI, dealing with diabetics or handling psych patients - the bread and butter of civilian EMS. I have skills - IV, IO, intubation - but those are just hand-eye things that are easy to learn. The real academic stuff that truly makes a paramedic, the Army didn't give me because it wasn't my mission. Now I'm not saying to not reclass. If you are truly interested in medicine, particularly military medicine, and you want to stay in the Army, go for it. It can be a very rewarding MOS. But as Doczilla said, you can end up in a fubar'd unit as a medic just as easily as any other MOS. I spent a few months with a TC unit and was nothing more than a glorified copy bitch, even though I was an experienced team leader at the time. I lucked out and most of my time in the Army, I loved my unit. I was attached to an infantry unit and loved my job. But they trusted me and my abilities, that's what made it great. Not every medic who came to us faired as well - they didn't make the cut so to speak. What it all comes down to is unit dynamics, from leadership to interpersonal - MOS has nothing to do with it. If all you are looking for is a way out of an f'ed up company, start pushing for a transfer. The mentality and basic leadership and soldiering skills that you have and will gain while serving will serve you well as a paramedic, regardless of MOS. And like chbare said, you can always start preparing yourself now education-wise. Good luck! If I can help with anything else, feel free to send me a PM.

BTW if it happened in my response area.... I would drop a deuce and give a major diesel bolus in the opposite direction at code 3. Scene Safety anyone?

Just something to note, remember that a "dirty bomb" is more about mass panic than true nuclear power. They're true design is as a psychological weapon - mention the word nuclear in a highly populated area and pandemonium ensues. Resources are stretched to the max immediately, major thoroughfares become congested, infrastructure starts to fail. That's the true weapon.

That's not say that they are not dangerous, but the real danger, particularly to responders, is in the initial explosion. The nuclear products contained in a dirty bomb is going to be obtained from sources like confiscated nuclear waste products or medical labs and lack the radiation strength to have a large fallout area or have many immediate effects on people. That doesn't make radiation of any type less scary, but just realize that there is a BIG difference between a dirty briefcase bomb and military-grade weapon.

*edited for clarity

Have you heard about the recent pavement painting snafu in NC?

Cringe-inducing typo outside NC school

Good luck, you can do it!

I've got a guy in my medic class right now who's the same age as my dad (early 50s). He's been an EMT forever, started the medic class when he lost his job as a drug rep. He's doing just fine (actually, he's usually at the top of the class). Otherwise, most of my class is in their early to mid-thirties. I'm actually almost the youngest at 27 (there's one 20yo). Age isn't everything, go for it!

edited for typo

Please read my posts I NEVER said an EMT should be doing anything ALS. I have stated repedatly that EMTs need more education then 120hrs. I have always said EMTs should have more training but NEVER,NEVER go beyond their SOP.

Also I never complained about Medics what-so-ever. In fact I respect them (check my posts) and hold them in high regard.

My quoted post was in response to another poster saying EMTs dont have the knowlege to make a decision to call ALS. Thats all. As Aeromedic stated some EMTs have many many years experience under the belts and can make informed decisions. On my squad alone we have 4 memebers that recently celebrated 25 years with the squad, several members at 10 years, and a few with 2 to 5 years. Now I am not saying the 2 to 5 year guys should be making judgment calls but surely the 10 and 25 year members sure can.

As for more medics... concidering NJ is a hospital based ALS state talk with the hiring hospitals, some dont want ALS units and the ones that do keep the amount to a minimum so unfortunatly its not the medics that are in short supply its the jobs.

Don't take this the wrong way, but I don't see this that as being something all that great. I understand that these folks have a great deal of experience and it does count for a lot, but I honestly see a real problem with anyone being an EMT for 25 years! Why?? Why stay at the lowest possible level? Maybe it's just me, my upbringing to strive for the best and never settle, I don't know. I just see someone who has spent an entire career as an EMT, never pushing beyond that, as failing in their mission to provide the best possible patient care. You should never stop learning. I see the career EMT-B the same as I see the 40yr old E-4 with gray hair and beer gut. Just getting by, no drive, and not the first to be trusted when the heat's on. And that may very well be an unfair assessment on an individual basis, but that's me being honest. I've met quite a few career EMTs (8+ years) locally and with every one, honestly, the first thing that entered my mind when I met each one of them was "why couldn't they cut it? what's holding them back? are they just lazy, complacent? don't want the responsibility?" And it had nothing to do with what I thought of them as a person. I know people can get the "I'm just a volunteer" mentality, but it doesn't matter - you're still responsible for people's lives! That means a responsibility to educate yourself continuously. I don't know, I guess I've never understood people who shoot for mediocre. I definitely don't think people like that are doing the industry any great service, rather, they are holding it back.

I'd say go for it! I don't know about how it's seen or approached in the EMS community, being new to it, but if it's anything like the military community, it's not well understood and often seen as weakness. It is something that I personally struggle with and I have actually just recently started to really see and understand the problem and seek help. A site that was suggested to me (CombatPTSD.org)does a really great job of explaining just what PTSD is, the different ways it can manifest and more. I have found it extremely helpful. The same guy hosts a non-combat related site as well. PTSD Forum You may find some useful info/resources/ideas on them. Good luck!

Lol, like it! Rumor has it that my great-grandfather actually put a pinch of gun powder in his coffee every day, but I never met him so who knows. He was a half-breed logger/trapper in the early 1900s.

I went to school for 2 years to get my paramedic and when I see these people advocating for more responsibility on a EMT's training level, I want to say NO NO NO NO. I worked for my medic and they should also have to work for theirs. Am I holding those whiny little snots back from their dream, nope, not at all, I'm merely making a stipulation that they put in the same level of commitement that I did, and giving advanced skills to someone with 3 months of education rubs me the wrong way.

I agree with you 100%, Ruff. I do often start IV's and have intubated as a basic, however, I am currently 1/2 way through medic school and the medics know this. They also know my military background and are confident in my ability. We're actually encouraged to get as much skills and assessment experience as we can, whether we're working or on a scheduled clinical shift. Any such procedures are always under the medic's supervision and anything we do we have already covered in class and in clinicals. It's an integral part of the education process here. But every Joe-Blow Basic doing advanced skills, unsupervised and without the education to back it up? Goes against everything we're trying to overcome as a profession - we need to be more than trained monkeys with "skills", training without education is dangerous.

Could you just narrow down what you mean by partial quadriplegic?

It means that the cord is not fully severed, but the lesion is at a level that effects all four limbs. He may have various combinations of sensation and motor control, most often there is limited ROM in the upper extremities, usually controlled by the chest muscles and very diminished sensation. Most people don't realize that the majority of "quads" aren't anything like Christopher Reeve, rather they push themselves around in wheelchairs.

Akinesia is a loss of normal motor function resulting in impaired muscle movement. ER doc last night described it as freezing in place.

Hypokinesis is just diminished or slow movement.

I completed an EMT-Basic class in Michigan, but have not completed the National Registry. I currently do not have a license.

I know there are a few non National Registry states. Is there any state that would allow me to obtain a license with just a copy of my certification that I've completed the course?

Are there any non NR-EMT states that would allow me to obtain a license without having to take a state test?

Thanks guys!

Michigan is getting rid of NR altogether and a lot of companies already don't require it. You can apply for MI licensure by exam without NR, go to MDCH Personnel Licensure. Finding a job here, however, is another story. Still, you could get licensed here then look for reciprocity.

I've got a Puretone Tactical, same model I used in the Army. I have a hard time focusing on single sounds, especially subtle ones (Trying to have a conversation in a bar? Forget it.). Anyway, it's reasonably priced, around $75, super comfortable and does a decent job of filtering out background noise.

Most of the Christianity/Catholicism posts have been mine, yet the people against a mosque at Ground Zero aren't against a church within 1000 feet of a school or playground.

Guess I have a hard time drawing that parallel.

It's one of those things that's implied with how it's written. If politics and religion is linked world wide, why specify "in the Muslim world?"

Because that's the context of this thread and the statement which I was responding to.

Unfortunately, the entire issue with the thread topic is people thinking that only Islam can be abused or manipulated.

I haven't seen that. Actually, quite a few posts have acquiesced to the Catholic church, Christianity etc having been misused in various situations and times in history. Things keep coming back to Islam, however, because it's the entire starting point of the thread and the circumstances and history making up the news story behind it.

Plenty of political issues even today in the Western world is motivated by politics. Gay marriage anyone? Blue laws? Additionally, to believe that other religions haven't been used to "mobilize, manipulate, govern, or justify their people and actions" shows pure ignorance of history. The abuse of religion that's going on with the Islamic terrorists of today has been used by plenty of other religions in the past. It is, by no means, a purely Islamic issue.

I'm guessing that first line is typo?

Where did I say that it was purely an Islamic issue?? Of course politics are motivated by religious views - religion helps to shape people's values, ideals and perceptions of right and wrong. Politics are also motivated by socioeconomic mores, family values, cultural beliefs, and the five o'clock news. That's not my point.

What I said was that you can't simply state that the 9/11 attacks were either purely political (as ambodriver stated) or purely religious - the two cannot be separated. I did say that this is particularly true in Muslim society, where governments are not only effected, but built upon a single religion, Islam. The Ayatollah is a supreme religious leader first and foremost, as are the royal families in Saudi Arabia, Yemen, and Oman. And we can't forget the Taliban. This is not a bias against Islam or Muslims, it's a statement of fact based on study of the religion, the region and first-hand observation of both.

Nowhere did I say that other religions aren't also abused or manipulated or that religion does not impact government elsewhere (including the US). That would be an ignorant blanket remark and I shy away from those. Perhaps you should do the same?

edited for clarity

Fluids don't really get to me much, although I am not a big fan of liquid BM (really, who is?). Vomit, eh just kinda ticks me off if I get puked on, but I'm not a sympathy puker or anything. I would say that probably what does or could get to me most are the smell of burning flesh and, depending on the situation, gunpowder/explosives. Has the potential of bringing up flashbacks.

Not to be devils advocate...

But the terrorists attacks were not because of religion, but because of political reasons. I don't see how so many people here think this is a religious attack. It really shows an immaturity to the topic. The 9/11 atacks were political in nature.

And of course, I have to add this in...b/c people will start calling me an american hating terrorist if I don't. I don't condone any of their actions, they were sick POS's. But it makes this situation a lot easier to understand if you know why were were attacked.

Not because they hate our "freedom" or because of our religion. It was strictly political and if you can't grasp why then there is no use really talking about the subject anymore is there?

That being said I don't care if they build a mosque. Not all muslims are terrorists. But the fact the terrorists were muslim will make it a hard sell, especially those ignorant enough to this this was a religious and not a political attack

Ok... problem with that is that, in the Muslim world, there is no delineation between religion and politics. It's a theocratic society. It may be very true that some members at the upper echelons of government/organizations may not actually be that religious, however religion is what they use to mobilize, manipulate, govern and justify their people and actions. You can't just say "it's not about religion," because for the foot soldiers, the suicide bombers, the pilots of those planes, it is very much about religion. I have absolutely no illusions that the brains and the money behind such operations have much more to their motives than 72 virgins and bringing glorious Jihad to Allah. If they didn't, they'd be strapping C-4 to their own chests rather than recruiting pissed off teenage boys to do it. But that does not take religion out the equation, not by a long shot.

Highlight of last night's clinical shift:

Patient comes into ER not feeling well for over 3 days. Fatigued, pale, diaphoretic.

EKG shows she is throwing crazy SVTs, heart rate 220.

Doctor: "You may have a problem with your electrolytes."

Patient: "Well... they have been flickering on and off all day."

Yes, that really happened.

LOL, "skid" to a stop!