EMS jobs and background

[Dustdevil]

to quote you with regard to the polygraph: "youre not gonna beat it."

Exactly. Nowhere did I say "there is absolutely NO way that ANY person can possibly beat it." Quit trying to put words in my mouth.

The same person that has test taking anxiety in a classroom, might well tell the absolute truth during a polygraphic examination and due to their anxiety, be listed as possibly not being truthful, which is the best the machine can do, regardless of what all those neato cop shows would have you believe.

I don't watch neato cop shows. I don't watch any shows except for the news and "Trailer Park Boys," ever since they took "Beavis & Butthead" off the air. My observations come from real life, not from television. I know polygraphers. I have taken polygraphs on several occasions. I have observed them on even more occasions. I have studied them. I know what they do and what they do not do. And what they do or do not do is simply not even relevant to this debate. It is what the person administering and interpreting the test does that is relevant! And polygraphers are acutely aware of all the techniques that nimrods read about on the Internet and use to try and beat the box. They know how it affects the results. Consequently, they know how to beat those techniques, or at least detect them. Those are what controls are for. Again, this is perfectly analogous to a piss test. They don't have to find the drugs in your system for you to be guilty. All they have to do is determine you cheated the test. That's enough.

You are looking at this thing through extremely narrow blinders. This isn't a paralegal discussion about the legal ramifications and admissibility of the polygraph. This is a discussion of whether or not you can use deceptive techniques to beat the box and the polygrapher not know it. You may beat the box, but your changes of beating the guy operating it are, again, slim to none. And whether or not all your paralegal education and experience tells you that it is admissible in court or not, his determination that you cheated WILL get your application thrown out of the hiring pool.

[NREMT-Basic]

A determination of cheating is virtually impossible. As I said, and i stand by my assertion based on my experience with these systems, there is no determination called "cheated...drop him like a hot rock" there is only "inconclusive, you make the call." As for putting words in your mouth, I wouldnt know how to fit them in there.

[Dustdevil]

...there is no determination called "cheated...drop him like a hot rock" there is only "inconclusive, you make the call."

In a perfect, theoretical world, maybe.

In the real world, I have sat on applicant review boards where this was exactly the case. The polygrapher sat down, showed us the results, explained why it was his professional expert opinion that the applicant was using techniques to be deceptive without the box detecting the deception. I'm sure if you look, even this is available on the Internet somewhere. Probably on the same sites as the so called "beat the box" techniques themselves.

Again, it is not the box that makes the determination. It is the operator. And a good one can smell deception a mile away. As an analogy, consider taking a pulse. If a lay person palpates a pulse, all he can tell you about it is that he feels a thump under his fingers. If an experienced medical profession takes it, he can tell you rate, regularity, strength, quality, and even an educated speculation of the heart rhythm it stems from. That is the case with the polygraph. The value is in the ihterpretation, not in the machine itself.

[mikejeff]

Original poster here. Some interesting discussion above. However, let me return to the original question.

All I've got is a misdemeanor that's been sealed. I'll be honest about. I smoked some pot during college and tried a few other things a few times. I'd be honest about that too. A very smart and able friend with a similar background was disqualified from being a firefighter for these reasons. I know another guy who wanted to be a police officer who's a smart badass who couldn't be a cop because he was beyond the limit of # of times (10) of trying marijuana. Again, I haven't touched anything in years.

I'm not gay, but our country has kicked a number of gay linguists who studied Arabic despite our dire need for people who speak the language because of bureaucratic nonsense. Not that I equate my past wrongdoings with being gay. Sorry - I know that reads bad.

Clinton smoked pot. Bush snorted coke. Cheney has multiple DWIs. Our probable next president, in my view Barack Obama, did coke.

I plan on being a paramedic for years before going to PA or med school. Will I have a problem getting a city-based paramedic job?

[akflightmedic]

It all depends on the city my friend.

Just a handful of departments do polygraphs and it is a very outdated and stupid practice.

If your record is sealed, then it is sealed. I would fess up about it if I were being subjected to a poly, however for any other job that isnt stuck in the stone age, I would not mention it. That is me personally but this is a touchy topic. A lot of people will call me out for the ethics violation, however I say you smoked pot when you were younger, you learned your lesson and you should not be deprived of the job you want for something stupid years ago. Or, you can always be truthful and frank about it. Yes, I smoked it in college, no I havent done it in years. If they pass over you, keep looking till someone decides to keep you.

Whichever route you choose, be prepared to live with any adverse repucussions.

But in general, no this will not prevent you from getting a job. Do you honestly believe out of the hundreds of thouosands of firefighters and medics that none of them smoked pot or got busted for it? Reality check dude...

[NREMT-Basic]

From a legal standpoint-

Federal law prohibits the introduction of information from a minor's sealed case. The are only a handful of people who may be given asscess to that record upon a request duly granted by a judge who has weighed the harm it might cause to unseal it vs. the good it would do. Those people are, in no special order:

the juvenile him/herself

the parents of the juvenile

counsel appointed as guardian ad litem to represent the minor in the delinquency adjudication

counsel who was appointed to "prosecute" the delinquency charge

the judge who adjudicated the case and in this case, that judge must present his written motion to unseal the record of a minor to another judge, who did not adjudicate the original case.

So ok...if you are worried about something that might come up during a polygraph because you are nervous about it, the yes, address it. But no one other than the persons of record listed above, have any right to request or be given permission to unseal the record. If you were of minor age when teh infraction occurred and are now of the age of majority, you can legally respond in the negative when asked about this case or charge, whichever it may be. BUt I do agree that probably just admitting it is the best way to go. Minors are not found guilty or not guilty, they are found to be delinquent or not delinquent. And here is a legal hair to split: if you answer no, you are technically correct, since once the record is sealed after the delinquency adjudication and the minor then reaches the age of majority, that offense is expunged and will never be allowed to brought up in court during an adult case, etc.

I am not giving legal advice, but rather information gather during years of work in the legal profession. The best policy is going to be just to say "yep, i did it when I was a minor" and let it go at that. This is kind of a damned of you do damned if you dont situation. Good luck.

[akflightmedic]

He wasnt a minor as it happened in college per his words...unless he was like Doogie Howser or soemthing.

[NREMT-Basic]

I also didnt notice that he was in Canada before I wrote that posting. Ah well.