*Lifeguard*

RIP Dustdevil

I am From Canada. We have a great system. Under the terms of the Canada Health Act, all "insured persons" (basically, legal residents of Canada, including permanent residents) are entitled to receive "insured services" without copayment. Such services are defined as medically necessary services if provided in hospital, or by 'practitioners' (usually physicians).^[2] Approximately 70% of Canadian health expenditures come from public sources, with the rest paid privately (both through private insurance, and through out-of-pocket payments). The extent of public financing varies considerably across services. For example, approximately 99% of physician services, and 90% of hospital care, are paid by publicly funded sources, whereas almost all dental care is paid for privately.^[3] Most doctors are self-employed private entities.

Which is a better Stethoscope: the Littmann Cardiology III or Littmann Master Cardiology Stethoscope ?

I enjoy pointing out the incorect assessment of my original post.

Read the other posts. They are toxic. None of the replies are connected to the topic. I am probably the first student to be granted a full refund. Toxic ranting with no real connection to the topic. internet whacko? Your lost. I only respond to the incomplete and toxic posts. Read them, Moby started it all. However, you don't comprehend this. internet whacko? it's ok for you to lash out? What a hypocrite.

I only respond to incomplete, toxic responses.

Look here, my friend... we don't give out negative points because we don't like you, we do so when you appear to be a friggin' troll! I read through all of the threads you posted as you posted them, and you rambled all over the place and made a mess in here. I'm sorry, but you then lashing out and calling people paranoid (with a definition no less) just makes you look even dumber.

"You're an internet whacko"? Your group is paranoid and delusional. None of you should have ever posted. It is just toxic ranting.

Congrats, you got your money back. Sorry you got screwed by the strike because you happened to be going through school at the same time that the strike happened.

Can you shut up now? Please? Even more telling is your need to come in here and flash around "oh lookee lookee I got my money back you all were wrong" when it really serves no purpose.

Or, even better... can you start posting on the clinical threads and actually PARTICIPATING in this forum instead of being wrapped up in your own little world all the time? There's a whole wide world of medicine out here, and all you want to do is piss and moan about how your clinical situation sucked and how some of the big bad mean Canuckian members here decided they didn't like you...

Thanks.

Wendy

CO EMT-B

Its true. Your funny.

But it's fun to poke fun at silly people and watch them put their foot in their mouth. It's like watching the really drunk guy try lighting a cigarette.. pure comedy.

I find your inability to understand my posts truly disturbing. The labour strike is directly related to my posts. If you can't figure that out, nobody can help you.

I was not attacking anyone. I wanted advice how to proceed, instead, I got several members obsessed that I was a Lawyer. Mobey was wrongfully linking a post from another site, addressing an unreported, sudden death of a worker. Once again, convinced that I was a Lawyer. He also thought I was another previous member returning under another name. Comparing my posts with his. Just paranoid, obsessive behaviour.

Read the latest posts. They are attacking me. Some of the seniors here feel they can post anything. When they are wrong, they can't accept it. Anyone who challenges your incorrect assessment of facts gets a "poor reputation". Big Deal. If poor reputations were based on incomplete and wrong assessments, you would all be given poor reputations.

Other members have here e-mailed me stating that most seniors here are sensitive about Lawyers investigating through this site. There was nothing presented that would have lead to this assessment. Mobey was instructing other members to be aware and not post.

Paranoid behaviour. However, I accept your apology.

Lifeguard I find your comments truly disturbing, Mobey was pointing out that the story you posted had nothing to do with your post. This is true is it not? To defend yourself saying your using that story to defend previous threads when that wasn't stated and then attacking others could be said to be a reflection of your practice then as well. I see that you have been required to edit all three of your posts, maybe you use creative documentation to cover your mistakes on the street? You also jumped to insults with any challenge, you state delusion of persecution above, could it be you are suffering from the same psychotic disorder you project onto Mobey? I also consider Mobey to be a good friend, and one who had befriended me quite quickly so saying he has an irrational distrust of others is insane.

I have not read any of your other posts, but I can imagine what they are like from your very poor reputation, and the content of what I see here, I question as to why you are here, I sincerely doubt that you are here to learn and share experience like most of us here but instead just a common troll only here to cause issues and headaches. The other option is that you are actually like this and for that I pity your partner.

Mobey, I think that this genius is refering to the fact that he finally received a refund for his paramedic course. Its unknown why he included a link about the strike itself, to give some background on the strike I suppose. Oddly, the story he links to is almost a year old. Bizarre. I guess they don't write news stories on fools who bleet about how unfair life and hold their breath until someone pays up. Hopefully lifeguard will take his refund, and never post on this site sgain.

"Its unknown why he included a link about the strike itself, to give some background on the strike I suppose. Oddly, the story he links to is almost a year old"

If you were aware of your environment, you would know that the strike lasted 1.5 years, closing the Paramedic Academy indefinately. However, both you and Mobey were convinced I was a Lawyer investigating Paramedics. Very paranoid. However, isn't paranoia a psychotic disorder characterized by delusions of persecution with or without grandeur, often strenuously defended with apparent logic and reason.

Extreme, irrational distrust of others

Just pointing out the wrong assessments made. Your previous reponses have been tainted with errors. Most likely a reflection of your Paramedic duties. Mobey was even contacting the Licencing Boards here. Quite obsessive and a little disturbing.

British Columbia Paramedic student granted full refund because of 2009 labour strike.

The 3,500 CUPE 873 members, who had been on strike since April 1, were seeking improved staffing levels, wage parity with other emergency response workers and a multi-year contract

Read more: http://www.cbc.ca/canada/british-columbia/story/2009/04/10/bc-paramedics-talks.html#ixzz17dLMtrM9

Just standing up to Moby and his friend. Both fear my posting.

Who is he attacking

What is the website of the canadian site?

It wasn't just about forgeting the protocol. It was his attempts to misrepresent that they were EMR protocols. Then he misrepresented covering them in class. It is really the obstruction and efforts to cover his tracks.

Read the postings. Both Mobey and his friend got heated about my posting. I think I hit a nerve. I think there is a history there.

We have a canadian site?

Read the postings. Both Mobey and his friend got heated about my posting. I think I hit a nerve. I think there is a history there.

We have a canadian site?

Who is he attacking

What is the website of the canadian site?

Thats not entirely true. There are members taking this discussion too personally. Read the responses

Who is he attacking

What is the website of the canadian site?

Mosbey's id dishonnest: "From where I sit it looks like you might just be lining some lawyers pockets to stand on a soap box for a little while".

Look at some of these posts. Prettey paranoid. Just can't take someone responding to their posts.

Dude, you are saying the same thing without giving us any more information. I believe you have said this already in this thread.

Do you see where your credibility is lacking here and this is why you are getting hammered.

If you would give concrete examples as to where this academy and it's agents performed below this standard of care it would help your case incredibly.

Just saying that you believe the instructor and academy performed below this standard.

Maybe you should get a attorney to review the standards of the act you are relying on to make your case.

Plus, what the heck are you coming here for? Seriously, all this place is good for (for complaints like yours) is to armchair quarterbacking. I don't think there is anyone in any level of power at the EMA that can help you here.

I would have thought by your reception the last time you came here you would have realized that you have to make a better case than just explaining your feelings and opinions without truly giving us facts.

In fact, you have not even given us the protocol you failed which makes it very difficult to give you good advice.

If indeed your instructor was a boob and you got bad instruction, it was incumbent on you to study the stuff that he didn't cover.

Spenac has it right, if students would study more than they currently do instead of expecting the stuff to be spoonfed to them, we'd have little use for instructors at all.

Seriously, paramedicine isn't rocket science, what you get from class is only the tip of the iceberg.

Do students these days expect to get spoonfed the information they need to work the streets? Or are there preceptors that make their preceptees have to think and only jump in when they are going to make a mistake?

If anyone remembers the old ACLS (torture class) where you actually had to learn and GASP, you could actually fail unlike now where we can't offend the sensibilities of the masses and not fail them no matter how horribly awful they performed.

Ahhh now we get some solid things to look at.

What part did you fail?

You should not have failed the modified jaw thrust

You also should not have failed the OPA

So I assume you failed the 1st one. WEre you able to veribalize that you'd be using a third person for this or did they not allow it.

See now we're getting somewhere.

The protocol presented during the trauma exam addressed a prone patient with noisy breathing. The patient had a fractured hip, c-spine issues, tib/fib fracture with moderate bleeding. I had one helper.

However, the exam required the student to use a sternal/spinal grip and roll to a partial lateral. The second helper would apply a modified jaw thrust, assess the airway, suction if necessary, measure and insert an OPA. The patient would then be lowered back to the prone position and the primary would be completed ect.

The examinor thought it would require three trained helpers. The exam was the first time this was ever seen.

The exam was the first time this protocol was seen. Even the Instructor had no idea how to complete it. The call was a prone trauma patient with noisy breathing. He felt it required three trained Paramedics. However, I had only one helper.

1) The first was to use a sternal/spinal grip and roll the prone patient to a partial lateral position

2) The second was to apply a modified jaw thrust

3) The third was to assess the airway, measure and insert an OPA and reasses.

The patient would be lowered back to the prone position, sandbags applied and the primary would be completede Ect....

It was crazy to think anyone could approach this with only one helper.

Ok, we will ask again,

Did you know that this protocol was going to be possibly tested?

Did you know ahead of time what that protocol was?

Please tell us about the protocol you failed?

Please give us a synopsis of what you are wanting us to do?

If you want support you can't just come in here, level a few unsubstantiated facts, disparage an instructor who is not here to defend himself and then expect that we will jump behind you just on your word.

first off we do not know you and you haven't been around here long enough to get a pass on us being skeptical.

Your first attempt at posting on here was a few months ago where you said you were a PCP student. (confused I am)

In your first attempt at posting here you were trying to re-open a months if not years old death case and wanted our support for that too. I believe that we weren't so supportive at that time either. You never came back to tell us if you succeeded in getting it reopened or not.

So this time you are trying to re-open a year or so old paramedic school situation that was found to be valid by the board that oversee's the classes or whatnot.

Please provide us with more information. It would improve your case here. If you cannot do that, then please drop this.

One thing I can't stand is a student who fails to appropriately prepare for a practical skill and then places all blame with the threat of regulatory action on the instructor.

Please tell us EXACTLY the nature of this "highly technical" skill that you feel was not presented to you.

While you are at, please validate as to what part the strike played. I feel it to be completely irrelevant.

Maybe then we can adequately have enough information to answer you appropriately.

PCP Instructors have an obligation to exhibit exemplary behaviour in order to preserve the integrity of the industry. Paramedics is an important and learned profession. As members of this profession, PCP Instructors are expected to exhibit the highest standards of honesty and integrity. PCP Instructors have a direct and vital impact on the quality of life for all people. Accordingly, the services provided by PCP Instructors require honesty, impartiality, fairness, and equity, and must be dedicated to the protection of the public health, safety, and welfare. PCP Instructors must perform under a standard of professional behaviour that requires adherence to the highest principles of ethical conduct.

The Paramedic Academy owes a duty of care, and I believe has performed below this standard of care. Ordinary reasonable care is not the minimum for Paramedic Instructors. EMA Licencing and the Emergency and Health Services Act should have a process in place that requires PCP Instructors to report public safety issues immediately, and without undue delay. I am not convinced that the Act allows EMA Licencing to learn about these ignored public safety concerns. A process must be developed that would ensure these public safety issues are reported.

One thing I can't stand is a student who fails to appropriately prepare for a practical skill and then places all blame with the threat of regulatory action on the instructor.

Please tell us EXACTLY the nature of this "highly technical" skill that you feel was not presented to you.

While you are at, please validate as to what part the strike played. I feel it to be completely irrelevant.

Maybe then we can adequately have enough information to answer you appropriately.

Incomplete training would result in public safety concerns. Concealing this is grossly negligent.

PCP Instructors have an obligation to exhibit exemplary behaviour in order to preserve the integrity of the industry. Paramedics is an important and learned profession. As members of this profession, PCP Instructors are expected to exhibit the highest standards of honesty and integrity. PCP Instructors have a direct and vital impact on the quality of life for all people. Accordingly, the services provided by PCP Instructors require honesty, impartiality, fairness, and equity, and must be dedicated to the protection of the public health, safety, and welfare. PCP Instructors must perform under a standard of professional behaviour that requires adherence to the highest principles of ethical conduct.

The Paramedic Academy owes a duty of care, and I believe has performed below this standard of care. Ordinary reasonable care is not the minimum for Paramedic Instructors. EMA Licencing and the Emergency and Health Services Act should have a process in place that requires PCP Instructors to report public safety issues immediately, and without undue delay. I am not convinced that the Act allows EMA Licencing to learn about these ignored public safety concerns. A process must be developed that would ensure these public safety issues are reported.

I kinda have to agree with the other posters here. Either 'fess up, tell us what the skill was and how they didn't prepare you for it, or your posts are pointless.

It is true that some people require more intense instruction as opposed to self-study, and this may be the case here, in which the instructor should have been accommodating this particular student's learning style. Without having the rest of the information, this is mere speculation...

Wendy

CO EMT-B

It was a combination of skills to address airway issues. However, the protocol is irelevant. The fact that it was not taught in class is serious.

Of course I knew that incomplete training would expose the general public to injury hazards. I also knew that the main function of the EMA Licensing Board is to protect the public. The Board has an important role in ensuring all practitioners involved with pre-hospital emergency care comply with the Emergency and Health Services Act. This provides assurance to the public that competent, consistent, appropriate and timely care will be available during medical emergencies.

My real occupation is Construction Safety, and as a Construction Safety Officer, I cannot ignore a process that intentionally obstructs and impeades with the process to hold paramount the safety, health and welfare of the public. I was hoping a few Paramedics would be more supportive.

I am a bit confused to the exact issue here. Please be more detailed. Besides what do you hope to gain from this forum if the EMS board has already reviewed the case?

Of course I knew that incomplete training would expose the general public to injury hazards. I also knew that the main function of the EMA Licensing Board is to protect the public. The Board has an important role in ensuring all practitioners involved with pre-hospital emergency care comply with the Emergency and Health Services Act. This provides assurance to the public that competent, consistent, appropriate and timely care will be available during medical emergencies.

My real occupation is Construction Safety, and as a Construction Safety Officer, I cannot ignore a process that intentionally obstructs and impeades with the process to hold paramount the safety, health and welfare of the public. I was hoping a few Paramedics would be more supportive.

Then why are you here whining about it? Be happy you won, go forth, multiply, and fill the earth. I still based on how you presented here disagree that the school failed you. And even if there was something lacking in the education program I can not see it being enough to warrant a refund or more. Sorry.

The school has been shut down for 1.5 years. How long would it take for this to be excessive?

One thing I can't stand is a student who fails to appropriately prepare for a practical skill and then places all blame with the threat of regulatory action on the instructor.

Please tell us EXACTLY the nature of this "highly technical" skill that you feel was not presented to you.

While you are at, please validate as to what part the strike played. I feel it to be completely irrelevant.

Maybe then we can adequately have enough information to answer you appropriately.

The strike occurred 30 days after the course ended. It shut down our Paramedic Academy since March 2009. Only one student completed the on-car portion of the class since March 2009. Ignoring the required training was just a shortcut to expedite the process to avoid the strike. I am recovering my money because of the amount of time. I am not going to attempt to take further training after 1.5 years. They have acted in an unprofessional manner

Disgruntled because you failed where others passed does not equal the school failing you. There are going to be some fail every quality program. Seems you were one of those and just can not accept that perhaps it is your fault rather than someone else's.

The EMA Licencing Board disagreed.

Did these "untrained students" successfully complete this exam?

I was the only one presented with this scenario. Just a lazy instructor. It has been 1.5 years and our Paramedic Accademy has been shut down because of a labour dispute. I am in a process to recover my money. Incomplete training and a 1.5 year delay = Breach of Contract.

I have never heard of any proper education where all material was covered in class. If the students do not study and do research they will not learn the material. Any student that expects everything they need to be a Paramedic to be spoken by the instructor is not living in reality. I am not trying to pick on you. Just as an EMS instructor I would hope no student would expect me to verbally tell them all they need. I require students to study if they want to pass.

The protocol was very technical and required several trained assistants. It was never addressed in class and this made it hard to complete.

It should have been discussed in class. The Instructor was quite dishonest about the protocols. There were 30 days before a one-year strike. He was trying to speed up the process to get the students out on car. Because I was unsuccessful at the exam, on the last day of class, I was restricted from completing the class.

If I was not allowed to complete the class, it is reasonable to conclude that the untrained students should not have proceeded to the on-car portion of the course, as well.

No on all accounts. Students should not expect every detail to be spoon fed to them. Perhaps as you were aware that the skills test was coming up you could have taken it upon yourself to study the material?

The material was not covered in the class. They tried to pass off the protocols as EMR protocols, misrepresenting that the students were required to be conversent with the protocols prior to the course. However, EMA Licencing Board varified that these ignored protocols were not EMR protocols. I think that if shortcuts were taken, and the general public was exposed to serious injuriy hazards, someone should be accountable.

One thing I can't stand is a dishonest Paramedic Instructor who thinks he is above the Law. If one of the untrained students killed someone, he would cover his ass, at the expense of the student he chose not to train.

I was a Paramedic student, whose class ended 1 month before the strike. During my trauma exam, and on the last day of class, a scenario was given, which required a protocol, which was not taught during the exam. Instead of ensuring the class was trained and conversant with the ignored protocols, the Instructor directed all students to the on-car portion of the class. I believe that the students were untrained and that these acts and/or omissions exposed the general public to serious injury hazards.

Would this be a licencing issue? Should I report this to the EMA Licencing Board? How does a student address these issues? Would the instructor be accountable?

The Coroner may conclude that early intervention would not help. I am pretty sure Lone Star suffered from the same incident, and survived. He was back on car and has limited deficits. Clearly, established safe work procedures and early invervention is key. In this case, the employer should have had established safe work procedures in place for these workers. They are working alone with no system in place to ensure access to a First Aid Attendant. They are not orientated to the facility to ensure they understand how to access First Aid, in the case of an emergency. Failing to do so, may have delayed treatment for this worker.

Although I am a PCP student, I have Construction Safety training. I am aware of the associated safety violations. Ignoring them only exposes workers to the same ignored hazards. Sometimes it is better to be proactive as a Paramedic and address the ignored safety hazards, as opposed to responding to a call of a seriously injured worker.

The purpose of reporting sudden and unexpected deaths are to investigate the circumstances surrounding the death. This was a large Government operated facility. There was serious obstruction associated with the incident. The person who conducted the tainted 2006 investigation was a former Police Officer. I believe that he had serious Duties to report this sudden, unexpected death to the Coroner.

I am a PCP student. I also have a backgound in Construction Safety and I am a certified Construction Safety Officer / Trades Safety Coordinator. The Coroner here is not a Doctor. I am trying to establish that established safe work procedures, training, orientations and early medical intervention is key. The workers at this facility did not have access to First Aid. The employer and Prime Contractor did not have established safe work procedures in place to ensure these workers were not working alone, in isolation, with no system in place to ensure communication with First Aid Services. They did not receive adequate orientations to the site, to ensure they understood the hazards associated with their workplace or how to access or where First Aid was located.

Sometimes it is important as a Paramedic to be proactive and ensure workers and the general public are not exposed to the same, ignored hazards, which will harm them. This is a Government operated facility. These safety violations are 26 years old. Clearly, the long term nature of the violations establishes a breakdown in the system. I want to ensure that a conflict of interest does not affect the investigation. The purpose of reporting these incidents are to ensure that they get investigated thoroughly, in the hopes that similar deaths can be prevented in the future.

You obviously must have missed the point here. With conditions such as this, there is nothing we can do prehospital. They need a neurosurgeon ASAP- period- if they have any chance of surviving and even then it's dicey. If that aneurysm is leaking or gawd forbid bursts, there is nothing we can do. Depending on where the problem is, the bleeding and pressure may not kill them immediately, but the prognosis is less than grim.

I am a PCP student. I also have a backgound in Construction Safety and I am a certified Construction Safety Officer / Trades Safety Coordinator. The Coroner here is not a Doctor. I am trying to establish that established safe work procedures, training, orientations and early medical intervention is key. The workers at this facility did not have access to First Aid. The employer and Prime Contractor did not have established safe work procedures in place to ensure these workers were not working alone, in isolation, with no system in place to ensure communication with First Aid Services. They did not receive adequate orientations to the site, to ensure they understood the hazards associated with their workplace or how to access or where First Aid was located.

Sometimes it is important as a Paramedic to be proactive and ensure workers and the general public are not exposed to the same, ignored hazards, which will harm them. This is a Government operated facility. These safety violations are 26 years old. Clearly, the long term nature of the violations establishes a breakdown in the system. I want to ensure that a conflict of interest does not affect the investigation. The purpose of reporting these incidents are to ensure that they get investigated thoroughly, in the hopes that similar deaths can be prevented in the future.

You obviously must have missed the point here. With conditions such as this, there is nothing we can do prehospital. They need a neurosurgeon ASAP- period- if they have any chance of surviving and even then it's dicey. If that aneurysm is leaking or gawd forbid bursts, there is nothing we can do. Depending on where the problem is, the bleeding and pressure may not kill them immediately, but the prognosis is less than grim.

The Coroner may conclude that early intervention would not help. I am pretty sure Lone Star suffered from the same incident, and survived. He was back on car and has limited deficits. Clearly, early invervention is key. In this case, the employer should have had established safe work procedures in place for these workers. They are working alone with no system in place to ensure access to a First Aid Attendant. They are not orientated to the facility to ensure they understand how to access First Aid, in the case of an emergency. Failing to do so, may have delayed treatment for this worker.

Although I am a PCP student, I have Construction Safety training. I am aware of the associated safety violations. Ignoring them only exposes workers to the same ignored hazards. Sometimes it is better to be proactive as a Paramedic and address the ignored safety hazards, as opposed to responding to a call of a seriously injured worker.

The purpose of reporting sudden and unexpected deaths are to investigate the circumstances surrounding the death. This was a large Government operated facility. There was serious obstruction associated with the incident. The person who conducted the tainted 2006 investigation was a former Police Officer. I believe that he had serious Duties to report this sudden, unexpected death to the Coroner.

You obviously must have missed the point here. With conditions such as this, there is nothing we can do prehospital. They need a neurosurgeon ASAP- period- if they have any chance of surviving and even then it's dicey. If that aneurysm is leaking or gawd forbid bursts, there is nothing we can do. Depending on where the problem is, the bleeding and pressure may not kill them immediately, but the prognosis is less than grim.