Dustdevil Posted March 12, 2009 Share Posted March 12, 2009 Lets be honest, there will never be one model for EMS. Accept it, move on, and attempt to foster positive relationships between different services and providers not online pissing matches and spewings of complete rumor with no basis rooted in fact. While I respect and appreciate your intelligent and well spoken post, I think you sort of went off the rails with that final statement. We've been "spewing" about the "facts" as presented by Lt. Kramer. Unless what he has told us is all a lie, the implication that our "spewings" have no basis in fact would be false. Other than that, the only real problem I have with your post is this semantic game of claiming that rookies are not "forced" to become paramedics. They are. Given the choice to opt out of EMS, the vast majority would. They are not choosing EMS as a profession, as you did. They are simply taking it as a necessary evil to get that cushy fire retirement down the road. Regardless of the semantics, they are being coerced to do something that they would rather not do, given the choice. And that plays a HUGE role in the attitude of those providers, ultimately preventing many of them to ever commit to professional excellence. I do genuinely appreciate you taking the time to further address the specifics of this topic with us! You are right. There is no one best model for EMS. And there are indeed fire-based EMS systems that excel. But most of us here will forever disagree with you that "good enough is good enough". You didn't think your salary and working conditions were "good enough" at the private service. We refuse to believe that minimum standard EMS is "good enough" for our patients, our families are us. And we further refuse to believe that we should simply "accept it and move on." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Diazepam618 Posted March 13, 2009 Share Posted March 13, 2009 Actually it does affect us. The IAFF and fire departments like yours is on a nation wide quest of fire based EMS for all. It is NOT the best way to deliver EMS, however it is in the fire services best interest and is the agenda of your Union. Funny you should mention that, I believe the compitetion between fire and privte make for excelent service, since niether wnat to be taken over by the other. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WolfmanHarris Posted March 13, 2009 Share Posted March 13, 2009 Funny you should mention that. I believe the competition between fire and private make for excellent service, since neither want to be taken over by the other. Huh? One is a concerted effort by a well organized lobby group aimed at taking over EMS across the board representing and providing resources and support for local FD. The other is a single company trying to stay in business without that organized support. On a long enough timeline, without Private or 3rd Service EMS having a strong equivalent counter to the IAFF, this seems like a losing proposition. How the heck does this provide excellent service. It's not a Store A vs. Store B situation where competition pulls down prices. It's a single service securing a contract to provide EMS response to 911 calls. How exactly would Fire EMS be taken over by private? If FD takes over EMS, the previous service ceases to exist. If reversed, FD continues, just without EMS. Honestly man, your whole post makes no sense. Ben, excellent post. I still disagree that the best eventual, permanent home for EMS should be FD (not a fan of privates either) and I have my strong doubts that an in house training program can provide the highest quality in EMS education. I still think that in the long term EMS needs to be a degreed program with a single level provider with maybe a post-grad diploma for critical care. But given your experiences I can see why MFD would be a better fit for you and I do understand the draw of FD as a career. Great first post and I hope we hear more from you from here on in. Welcome to the city. - Matt Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MontvilleFire39 Posted March 13, 2009 Share Posted March 13, 2009 Dust, i guess it depends on what your definition of good enough is. To me good enough is a service that allows me to practice my craft at a level that I find acceptable and that as a whole provides care at an acceptable level, provides me a livable wage, suitable benefits, stabel retirement, and will foster professional development. The "good enough" aspect comes into play due to the fact in a system with 400 plus practicing paramedics, some will be subpar, some will be medics only to get hose time, and some people will be complete douche bags but overall the negative aspects are the minority which is what I see in this case. To the poster(s) that criticized Memphis for not allowing single role providers; find somewhere else to work. It is their perogative. Is your third service going to allow me to provide fire suppression as well because I have a desire to? FWIW, the paramedic program is being spearheaded by individuals who began as single role providers before cross training began.In speaking with some of them, they have a strong commitment to "weed out" individuals who have no desire to provide prehospital care at an acceptable level. I share that belief and when and if I am place in a preceptor role (which I intend on pursuing), I will not sign off on anything less that professional, competent care. Unfortunately their are other factors that I feel will limit this ability that I don't feel are appropriate for discussion in public forum. Additionaly, upon completion of the program all new paramedics will be mandated to participate in an FTO program which adequately covers administrative and patient care aspects of performing in the field. I came through this program and found it to be quite impressive. I wholeheartedly agree on increasing education and entry requirements in the prehospital arena. I feel it is the only way to legitamize the profession. However until the overall industrywide compensation and working conditions improve, it would be difficult at best tom compete with other career fields such as nursing. On the flip side I don't see compensation and working conditions improve until training and entry requirements rise. It's a two head snake...see where Im heading with this? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spenac Posted March 13, 2009 Share Posted March 13, 2009 To the poster(s) that criticized Memphis for not allowing single role providers; find somewhere else to work. It is their perogative. Is your third service going to allow me to provide fire suppression as well because I have a desire to? Yes it will allow you to work for the fire department on your days off. Why should a Paramedic that does not want to fight fire have to move to work? Heck even the IAFF has said it is impossible to do multiple tasks well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MontvilleFire39 Posted March 13, 2009 Share Posted March 13, 2009 Yes it will allow you to work for the fire department on your days off. Why should a Paramedic that does not want to fight fire have to move to work? Heck even the IAFF has said it is impossible to do multiple tasks well. Spenac, Im not quite sure what your getting at with this. Agencies don't have a responsibility to provide individuals with a career that suits their individual needs, but rather a responsibilty to employ people who fit into their decided method of delivery. Where you / are you from the Memphis area desiring to work as a single role provider? If so their are several other agencies surrounding that allow for this type of work. In fact I am on duty at one right now where I work part time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts