500lb man sues FDNY for droping him

[Michael]

Since, to my surprise, none of this patient's critics here has, uh, weighed in on what seems to me an obvious question, I will pose it:

At what weight does one disqualify for being secured to a stretcher?

Or what am I missing here? You needn't advise me that our legal liability/insurance systems need improvement, nor that some individuals exploit them for financial gain, nor whose "fault" obesity is. I'm not looking to start a fight about anything. I would sincerely like to know (as will the judge if the plaintiff's case goes to trial) what aspect of this story, in your view, absolves rescuers of fault. All criticism here has gone to the injured man, his imputed motives and those of his attorneys, and the system that may reward them; no one has criticized the actions of those responsible for his safety who - what? - could not? should not? - have kept him from falling.

So, my sincere questions, addressed to compassionate providers: Is transporting an unsecured pt. standard procedure if the stretcher is improvised? Do responders "triage" features of an emergent case, so that strapping the guy is sometimes less important that removing him from the building any which way? I haven't been a firefighter nor an obese pt., so I'm here, respectfully, to learn. Please treat my inquiry accordingly.

[akflightmedic]

Michael, most of the older stretchers are rated up to 450 lbs and are narrow, which means a lot of rolls hang over or feet extend off the stretcher.

The newer stretchers have a few extra inches added in width and are rated up to 600lbs, but again it is a challenge actually getting these patients on the stretcher and then getting the rails up and we have yet to begin the lifting process.

When this amount of weight is on the stretcher, obviously they are very top heavy, so they should not be lifted to a pushable height. This means the providers must be stooped over pushing a heavy load until the fun part of lifting into the transport vehicle.

Now there are new stretchers designed for this particular type patient however they are not entirely common as of yet. Since these stretchers are much larger. they also require a larger ambulance which itself sometimes has an automatic electric lift so no one gets injured.

For the uninformed, we never take a patient down flights of stairs as this is dangerous for all involved. A few steps yes, a few flights, no. We like to use a stair chair for this purpose, however this patient definitely exceeds the weight for that device as well, not to mention how awkward it would be to use if he were able to get on it.

Now the task fell upon 10 FFs to figure out how to extricate this patient. It seems they chose a workable scheme however they failed or were unable to secure him to the improvised board. I do not have any further details and dont know anyone who was involved, so it is hard for me to even imagine what they came up with and why it did not work.

This is purely speculation on a possible scenario, but is something that has happened with me personally many times. It could be possible that the patient shifted his weight and caused them to drop him. This has occurred many times when loading and unloading patients in the ambulance, so I see how it could occur if they were toting him on a sheet of plywood.

Despite warning patients about the loading and unloading process and assuring them we have them and will not drop them, so many of them flail about and shift their weight which does indeed cause us to sometimes dip the stretcher or turn at an angle. They even like to grab the doors as they roll past which again causes drag on us and has potential to harm us.

I could see how this large man having to be extricated during an emergency situation where anxiety/stress is already present may also have been embarrassed at the great effort it was taking on everyones part to do so. I can imagine him trying to assist or even grabbing out during some of the shaky parts causing weight shifting.

Since we do not know all the details, I can only speculate but this is a very plausible scenario.

[Michael]

Thanks, AK! Your careful intervention is delivering me of perplexity.

So my take on it now is that the extraordinary circumstances of an atypical rescue whose optimal execution surpasses available equipment may reduce the responders' responsibility into a category similar to the "Good Samaritan" statutes that exempt non-professionals' from liability. That is, negligence would have to be willful, to at least egregious, to show that those attempting to help weren't acting in good faith.

Simply put, since extraordinary cases can't be held to ordinary standards, the situation itself diminishes the rights of those at circumstantially extraordinary risk.

Or: There's a natural limit to how much the world will adapt to your needs. And as you said, the details of the event would reveal where, in this instance, that limit falls.

[katgrl2003]

The company I work for has a bariatric cot, and it is rated for 850lbs in the up position, and I believe 1600 in the down position. It can fit into any truck, as it uses the standard truck mounts. We have a bariatric truck with ramps and a winch, but it is out of service right now. The cot makes our job easier, but we still run into difficult situations, such as this one.

-Kat

[tskstorm]

Thanks, AK! Your careful intervention is delivering me of perplexity.

So my take on it now is that the extraordinary circumstances of an atypical rescue whose optimal execution surpasses available equipment may reduce the responders' responsibility into a category similar to the "Good Samaritan" statutes that exempt non-professionals' from liability. That is, negligence would have to be willful, to at least egregious, to show that those attempting to help weren't acting in good faith.

Simply put, since extraordinary cases can't be held to ordinary standards, the situation itself diminishes the rights of those at circumstantially extraordinary risk.

Or: There's a natural limit to how much the world will adapt to your needs. And as you said, the details of the event would reveal where, in this instance, that limit falls.

Only problem here is in NY there are no good samaritan laws, here people believe if you are a professional and identify yourself as such that they will be treated on the same professional level as everyone else. Of course all patients get the same treatment, however stopping to help someone without an ambulance is like showing up to work naked or something. You just don't have what you need to treat the patient properly.

Other situation is coming from knowing the NYC system, we don't have any standard equipment meant to carry that much weight. The blame and responsibility, does not go to the FF's here, the blame goes to the on scene emt's and paramedics who were responsible for the patients transport and care.

I will agree rare situations cause us to improvise, and adapt. I'm sure the Crew did take the appropriate measures such as calling the FF's to help with the lift/move. Trying to keep everyone safe, my question for all of you they rigged a pulley operated plywood lift. How do you think they secured the patient to the wood ? unless they drilled holes into it on the side like longboard handles to put straps in, then how ? Even if they drilled such holes, is the plywood strong enough to hold that of weight through those holes? Seems a little fishy to me

[firedoc5]

Remember in "Mother, Jugs, and Speed" the lady they dropped down the stairs? I don't remember if she threatened to sue.

I know it would be covered in Workman's Comp., but what about a medic/firefighter "dropped a nut" or worse, trying to carry someone like that in a difficult situation? Could they sue the patient? (Sorry, just thinking out loud, I know, dangerous for me)