DwayneEMTP

As explained before, having to assist vents is a pretty rare situation in my experience. Where you will find it on a relatively reliable basis is with geriatrics that are exhausted from a prolonged effort to breath.

But also as mentioned having a BVM without O2 in the vast, vast majority of cases will be of little value. Good question though...

As asked before, why are you not taking your EMT yet? Age? You seem like a really good fit...

Yeah, but if you'd done that Kat then I'd have had to spend half of my day looking for something else to bitch about. You did me a favor!

Sometimes I think we get a little bit off track, me at least as much as anyone else....just trying to help us remember that being a new member in a group of really smart established members can be really intimidating. I know it was for me, and continues to be sometimes. We need to keep admin fed if we're going to continue to enjoy this place full of amazing people...we need to keep that in the front of our minds I think...

Grin...all is well.

I'm currently an American paramedic in Komo, Papua New Guinea. I work for a company that, amongst other things, supplies medical personnel to really remote parts of the world.

Man, I'm maybe having a grumpy day, I'm not sure, but why did so many of you in this thread find it hard to at least answer the question while having your fun??

Remember back in the old days when we taught our new folks acceptable behavior here by setting a good example first? Like showing some respect for the first thread of a new member?

Grammar is terribly important in my opinion, not only for efficient communication but also for more clear and logical thinking and reasoning. Correcting it should be a favor, again as it used to be, but for some reason we seem to have come to believe that trying to humiliate people into using proper grammar isn't only productive (it isn't) but fun...and I don't see how anyone can find the humiliation and most often elimination of new members here, to be fun.

If this memeber comes back, which he almost certainly won't if history is used as evidence, he will have learned to be rude, to make jokes throughout the threads of others without making the slightest effort to contribute, and that EMT City, like much of EMS, is made up of about 80% arrogant assholes with a few kind, productive folks sprinkled in. And we should all be ashamed of that.

I am encourage though by the fact that those that made the most effort to particiapte in a good spirit, with some obvious exceptions, were also those with lower post counts...I'm not sure what that means, but perhaps it bodes well for our future...

You know jnj, unfortunately it sounds like you've just been part of a pretty bad program.

Leaving people alone to test not only invites cheating but shows the value that your program places on their tests. They have no respect for them, so few others will either. Of course that doesn't make cheating right, but it's been my experience that the vast majority of those going into EMS care little for education and/or right and wrong.

I too made some waves in my paramedic class, not necessarily based on right and wrong but instead on the basis that I paid a high price, both financially and emotionally to take it and was unwilling to settle for poor when I felt that I could make something better. On my first night in class (college level, 6 semester course) we were playing a Jepardy kind of game. One of the answers was "Oral Pharynx". The person on the other team answered "Oral Pharnyx", in my experience a common mispronounciation. They were given the point, which I could really have cared less about, but I said, "That answer's not correct, right? It's prounounced "Pharynx." The instructor said, "That's ok, it's close enough." I said, "Were in a paramedic class, how can misprounouncing common anatomical terms be ok??" "Let's move on...." was the answer.

A few weeks in the one other student that really cared about his grades and I were comparing test scores, he having beaten me by a few points which pissed me off royally, and a different instructor butted into our conversation, saying, "Oh...you're one of those students that believes that they are going to put your test scores on your patch, right? None of that matters in the real world..."

So I finally went to the chair of the EMS section and complained, both verbally and in writing, about the attitudes of those that I was paying nearly $10k to teach me to become a competent paramedic. I'm not sure what was done, but only that the instructors became pretty chilly towards me for a few weeks, leaning on me pretty hard each time there was a chance. I cared little for their attitudes, as I was solidly a member here at that time so got all of the support I needed at the City, as well, pushing me harder and trying to create more stress is exactly what I wanted from them, so it was a win/win. I got a better education, and I believe that I left the program better than I'd found it.

When I read your posts it sounds to me like that is more what you were looking for also. Not a chance to say, "Look, Bob and Sally were cheating!! Neener neener they should get in trouble!" But instead to create a better program to learn in and to leave it better than you found it. I like both of those things.

As far as allowing weak people to pass skills....that makes me see red. If you can't man/woman up under the pressure of a teaching environment then you will almost certainly be useless when my family calls for your help. And for me, that's what it boils down to. Who will you be, what will you be capable of when my wife or son calls for your help?

I like your attitude a lot...But as you've seen in the past, should you try and be an intelligent provider, should you be willing to stop and say, "This is unacceptable and I'm not going to allow it to happen.", you will rarely be popular.

And last, but not least, what an excellent first post! Thanks for taking the time to participate...

Hey all, sorry so long to respond.

Medical control wouldn't be a realistic option in this environment. I do have medical control that I can call but they're either in Singapore or Sydney. They don't have much idea what goes on in environments that we work, they are primarily for medical advice, maint of company policy compliance, and helping to arrange medivacs. They would have been happy to speak to him, but the likely outcome would have been that he'd've refused to follow their instructions also, and they may have demanded that I take him against his will, something that I would have refused to do, the refusal of which would have possibly been terminal to my continued employment with this company. So I didn't see any up side to involving them.

I did consider talking to his employer, but he's also, like me, employed by a company that's outside of the country and subcontracted to a trucking company in country. They might have helped, if getting past the language barrier was likely, which it wasn't, but more than likely once notified they forgot about him and were on the phone demanding to know when replacement truck driver would arrive.

I didn't follow up with him, but my guess is that they amputated the leg and he went on his vacation as planned. He would have needed to be medivac'd to Brisbane or Cains for any chance for reattachment efforts, and he would almost certainly not have made it to either place for 24-48hrs.

I'm surprised that chbare hasn't chimed into this conversation yet.

I don't know why it's contraindicated, but my guess would be that the odds of it being necessary would be almost nonexistant, particularly having such a patient as mentioned here, as well the odds of success being dismal, combined with the damage that someone that would try such a thing would likely do to the airway anatomy while they bashed the tube around hoping for their "lucky shot."

Chbare tells us that tons of damage is often accidently done by paramedics doing normal ett placements, I can't imagine that doing blind netts would be any better, and almost certainly worse.

As Capt said, HR may wish that they could keep them out based on their appearance, but they'd better be careful when attempting to do such things. Plus, it's been my experience that as HR rarely has to actually work with anyone that they hire that they are not overly concerned with such things.

Also, I'm not sure what the discrimination suit would be, but I don't believe this to be a sexual orientation issue.

Man Beibs, good points. I didn't consider a fair scale for hireability....and until I'm able to come up with such a thing then change my opinion to "of course they should be hired."

Often I've seen, and allowed my opinion to be colored by those that make me think, "God damn it...I'm sorry that you carry this extra burdon, but make some kind of effort!"

Thanks for the reality check.

Brother,I'm confident that this is a theoretical question posed as first person fact, for the reasons mentioned above as well as others...

Great response Cykes!

actually, I don't believe the question is so simple. Having worked in Trinidad Colorado I've been exposed to many that were living as opposite genders prior to surgery, and very often their passability is far from ideal. Garish makeup, terrible, unstyled wigs, etc. much of what we do is provide comfort, yet being in a place where I was expected to pretend that a man dressed as a woman from a comedy or horror show as unnoticeable made me uncomfortable. Should patients be forced to perform the same mental and emotional gymnastics? I don't think so. My heart hurts for these people, but it hurts also for those too small, handicapped, or injured to do the job, so should they then too be allowed to work in EMS based on my wish that everyone would be allowed to make a living in any way that they choose?

I've worked with gay and lesbians, and currently work on a project populated by 37 nationalities, so it will be tough to make a sentence of bigot or repressive stick to me I think....

If one is passable, then I see no issues, if not, then I see no way to claim that they can truly do the job, as a patient advocate, based simply on their ability to lift as much, or push the same drugs as another....right?

Based on your posting history alone there is no doubt in my mind that you have a medics heart and spirit. None.

Based also on your posting history there is no doubt in my mind that you will be less popular in medic school than you are now.Medic school, like basic, is filled with yahoos and sprinkled with those that make them look bad by trying to excel. Every place I've ever worked I've been popular...until I've taken a stand on something, or performed a procedure that others were afraid of....I mean terrifying stuff like starting an EJ...

But you know what? If I'm never loved and respected by anyone else but the people that have badgered me, kicked my ass, called me out, and held my hand here, then I'll consider myself a success as a medic.

I've been blessed to work with some amazing medics, have been schooled by more amazing providers here, yet am aware of none of them that is followed around by people asking permission to be president of their personal fan clubs. Some day I hope to consider myself their peer.

Constantly in EMS right is going to collide with popularity, and the path you choose in those sometimes uncomfortable, sometimes terrifying moments will define you as a provider.

I'm more than comfortable saying now that as a provider...my money is on you. Kick ass Babe...let the pussies console each other because in the end there will be a bunch of ER doc's, a few nurses, a surprisingly large number of basics, and a rare few others, that you'll give one shit about what they think one way ore the other. The others will watch you from the sidelines...part will swear you're an idiot, others will swear that they could have done better, but only a rare few will actually have the balls/ovaries to have even gotten in the game...

Stay here would you? I'm excited to watch you walk your path regardless what level of provider you choose...

You've been missed here Brother...though I have to admit I was shocked to find that you have a heart!

You're important here...don't go pulling any more of that shit, ok? We expect dinosaurs like Kat to keel over at any second, but we don't like to worry about our youngsters...

First, this thread should be focused on the intent of the OP. Did they have the right to search, and at what point are you too mentally ill to own/possess a firearm? (to my reading.)

I don't see the issue with searching his things. The police have those limits as they are looking to gain evidence that can be used to alter your life and remove your civil and constitutional rights. We are, or should be, doing it for the protection of ourselves and those around us only. We have no right, nor obligation, to be collecting evidence in the situation described.

I don't have time to investigate the line in the sand for psych issues/gun possession, but I love the question!

Aussie, this is America, not Australia. We don't need to prove that we need something in order to have the right to own it. It instead needs to be proved that there is an exceptionally valid, unquestionable reason not to have it in order to remove that right. That just simply hasn't been done in this case, in my opinion. America is a land of guns. There is no even remotely probably plan, that I've ever heard, to unring that bell..

It seems like the preceeding police dialog alone should be all of the evidence necessary to show that the victim should have expected to be prepared to defend himself.

Is such a statement not assault when it comes from law enforcement?

Isn't saying "There is no reason for anyone to ever need to own such a weapon." akin to saying, "There is no reason that anyone should ever need to read that book."

Where is the difference in spirit?

(Sorry DFIB if this question is answered in your videos. I'm trying to get back into my City duties but didn't have time to watch them right now.)

Triemal04's points have been validated in the past, so while I'm not going to allow the Kiwi 'calling out' to continue, I'm also not going to allow any Triemal bashing to begin. He had reasons to be pissed, and to be pissed still, but there is no benefit to the board in rehashing it. Those that have been here a few days know how terribly ugly that got.

Triemal, enough said Brother.

Kiwi, we have no need or desire to hear your medication and psychological history attached to nearly every post. Many here love and respect you, but I will from now on, when I have access at least, delete any post, and any associated posts, that make the tiniest hint at suicide. I see no benefit to you from the never ending pity party you've come to love so much. Many of us have burdons in our lives that we consider 'heavy.' Take those conversations to private if there are those that want to hear about it, or keep them in threads focused on such issues.

Everyone else....Please, please, please, let's try not to get follow others down these unproductive paths. There's just no benefit that I can see to all of that negative energy.

Dwayne

Almost two years since this man died...craziness.

Does anyone know what the cops are doing while they await trial? I'm guessing paid leave?

Chief, you remind me of a paramedic show that I saw once where a kid was dying from something (not a kid, kid, but a mid 20s or so kid) and refused treatment. I don't remember the ailment...the medics stood by, said, "that's ok, if you won't come with us we'll wait until you become unresponsive and then take you based on implied consent..."

What is everyone's feelings on that? Choosing implied consent despite being told specifically while the patient was still competent?

I once had a COPDer/CHFer crumping...tripoding, accessory muscles, one or two word sentences, exhausted...made it clear, as did his wife that under no circumstances, to include death, should he be intubated. Initiated CPAP, pushed steroids (yeah, I know), bagged in nebs through the CPAP, but his still soon became unresponsive enroute. Discontinued CPAP, Poor compliance to bagging...I really, really wanted to intubate, but chose to honor his wishes...I've know others that have had like issues and made the oposite decision and I'm not sure that I disagree with them...This guy was only in his 30s if I remember right..seemed crazy to me to risk death or significant morbidity on such a decision...maybe the patient isn't always right?

What do you think?

My point would be that the Constitution is a living/breathing document; as brilliant as our founding fathers were, there is no way that they could forsee today's issues from the view of the 1700s, which is why we have amendments to "upgrade" as times change. I agree that everyone should have the right to bear arms, but there is no reason for an ordinary citizen to own an assault rifle. You have the right to free speech, but you can't yell "fire" in a crowded theatre (not sure why that would cause a panic these days). So I am a Republican (really prefer conservative) who is for common-sense when it comes to gun ownership and rights.

You make a claim to common sense in regards to gun ownership, yet seem to support the banning of weapons that are almost never used to kill anyone, right? Many more people are killed with cars, knives, and firearms that carry much less ammunition. With that being the case, how is their banning common sense? (Sorry, not sure if this sounds like sniping, but it's not meant to be.)

Since when does, "No one should really need to own one of those" sound reasoning for banning something?

For the record I'm also fiscally conservative yet with no desire or intention of ever owning any of the types of guns in question. I argue only from what I believe to be the American spirit and the spirit of the constitution/Second Amendment..

Hey Beibs, I can't remember if I considered the option of meeting her enroute or not. I'd like to think that I did, but if I didn't I certainly should have.

It is an interesting point that we're forced to take someone against their will secondary to suicidal ideologies or actual attempts, but allowed (forced?) to leave someone that we believe could be making a decision that will lead to the premature ending of their life, right?

Yikes, Kat, a little on the grumpy side?

This is the 'funny stuff' forum Brother, drivel is exactly what it's intended for... :-)

Deep breath my friend...it's all going to be ok...

Hey all...Sorry, only have a little time with internet, not nearly enough to respond as everyone deserves and won't be able to before it's time for me to fly home likely...

I don't believe that all the guns in the world would allow me to defend myself from an out of control govt, yet I also don't see where saying, "screw it, I can't have enough guns, so I might as well not have any." The spirit in the gun ownerships is the same I think.

Maybe my biggest argument is that once again we're going to try and demonize certain weapons instead of identifying and mitigating the pathologies in our society that are truly causing the issues.

We've demonized drugs and put a ton of people into prison for them, without creating any type of measureable gain. Demonized sex, yet kids are getting pregnant younger and younger, demonized prostitution, yet it thrives and is often visited by those making the laws against it.

Now we want to demonize a class of weapons despite 99.999% of those weapons being used in a law abiding manner, simply so that we can allow a ton of people in the country to feel that something productive is being done when once again we're just pretending...

I'm really tired of watching society apply bandaids to cancers....And even more tired of watching the celebrating afterwards of those saying, "See! We can't see the cancer any more! It's the same as being cured!"

Blah...

But it was also the federal Govt, led by the FBI, that did those things at Waco, right?

And I'm not suggesting that a time to rise up and violently defend ourselves against any level of govt is here, or even near, but only that to wait to prepare until the s/s of such a need appear would make it a bit late, don't you think? As well, that the attempts by our govt to infringe on a basic constitutional right should be considered one of the signs and symptoms that should perk up people's ears and raise suspicions that things are going sideways.

A woman can not choose to abort her own fetus, a gay couple can not be recognized in the face of the law, we have kids in prison for lifetimes for selling/smoking weed when the much more destructive drug, alcohol, is sold freely, we have people being beaten to death by the police on video tape without the slightest punishment being delivered, the govt has begun passing laws to which they have exempted themselves, etc, etc, yet for some reason, when the govt suggests that I should relinquish my ability to defend myself against them, I'm seen as unreasonable when I choose not to trust in them to behave logically, and/or in my best interest?

What in the above situations is logical? Why should I suddenly believe that their handling of my right to bear arms will be more so?

It truly makes me batshit crazy when people say, "Well, yeah, Waco. That was a mess, but they were just a bunch of idiots anyway..." Waco wasn't a mess. It went on for WEEKS, every govt agency in the country had the time and ability to step in an stop it, even to the point of several of the FBI units walking away and abondoning their stations in protest of the actions taken, yet the country watched as those people were burned to death. Then we watched on national television as the FBI destroyed and altered evidence....yet nothing was done...I don't know why more people aren't horrified by that.

Now, many would have us all sit in front of our televisions and watch again as they attempt to disarm us, using the "no need for these weapons for hunting" argument....The second amendment isn't about hunting, it's about freedoms. Freedoms that we enjoy, and the freedoms that we need to feel obligated to violently defend should that need be forced upon us.

Again...I'm not Minuteman...I don't like guns much though I grew up as a hunter. I spend a lot of time out of the country so I have two handguns at home for defense purposes...mine is not an argument for a call to arms...but a search for some kind of realistic view of the situation. Should we have mandatory background checks and training in order to own firearms? Of course...can we? No...Why? Because there is much, much more evidence than should be necessary to show that the govt, at any level, has proved that they are not able to handle that type of responsibility morally and ethically...