# Liability of an EMT acting strictly as a driver.



## jordanfstop (Sep 6, 2008)

In my town there is an ambulance service you may all be aware of (Hatzolah [a VAS ran by Orthodox Jews.]) On Shabbos (the Sabbath) they pay non-Jewish drivers to drive their ambulances (I don't want to get into a debate of why they can drive their cars to the scene, but not the ambulance.) Basically the role of them (driver) is to wait around for a call, drive their car to the station, pick up the rig and take it to the scene where the EMTs will already be there in their POVs. The driver basically sits in the rig waiting for them to move the patient out of the house, opens any doors (that may involve using electricity) for them, drives the patient to the hospital, writes the PCR at the hospital, and drives the rig back to the station. The driver has minimal-to-no patient contact (and they mostly are speaking Yiddish to each other only.)

Now to the question, does the driver have any liability if pt tx goes against state protocol and the call gets called to court?


----------



## ffemt8978 (Sep 6, 2008)

jordanfstop said:


> In my town there is an ambulance service you may all be aware of (Hatzolah [a VAS ran by Orthodox Jews.]) On Shabbos (the Sabbath) they pay non-Jewish drivers to drive their ambulances (I don't want to get into a debate of why they can drive their cars to the scene, but not the ambulance.) Basically the role of them (driver) is to wait around for a call, drive their car to the station, pick up the rig and take it to the scene where the EMTs will already be there in their POVs. The driver basically sits in the rig waiting for them to move the patient out of the house, opens any doors (that may involve using electricity) for them, drives the patient to the hospital, writes the PCR at the hospital, and drives the rig back to the station. The driver has minimal-to-no patient contact (and they mostly are speaking Yiddish to each other only.)
> 
> Now to the question, does the driver have any liability if pt tx goes against state protocol and the call gets called to court?



The driver, who has minimal patient contact, is the one who writes the PCR?!?!:blink:


----------



## MAC4NH (Sep 7, 2008)

I'm not a lawyer or a NY EMT, but to me, if he's signing the PCR, he's probably got liability.  If he doesn't do the PCR and he can prove that he does not have significant pt contact, maybe he can make a case.  However, since he's an EMT and on scene with the truck, it might not hold water.

I don't know NY regs, but many NJ volly squads have non-EMT drivers.  Since they don't really do patient care, they're really only liable for driving matters.


----------



## medicdan (Sep 7, 2008)

jordanfstop said:


> In my town there is an ambulance service you may all be aware of (Hatzolah [a VAS ran by Orthodox Jews.]) On Shabbos (the Sabbath) they pay non-Jewish drivers to drive their ambulances (I don't want to get into a debate of why they can drive their cars to the scene, but not the ambulance.) Basically the role of them (driver) is to wait around for a call, drive their car to the station, pick up the rig and take it to the scene where the EMTs will already be there in their POVs. The driver basically sits in the rig waiting for them to move the patient out of the house, opens any doors (that may involve using electricity) for them, drives the patient to the hospital, writes the PCR at the hospital, and drives the rig back to the station. The driver has minimal-to-no patient contact (and they mostly are speaking Yiddish to each other only.) Now to the question, does the driver have any liability if pt tx goes against state protocol and the call gets called to court?



Here is my understanding of liability. Please correct me if I am wrong. In MA, in order for an ambulance to “roll” there need to be two providers trained at the level of the ambulance (or care), that is, two EMT-Bs for a BLS and two medics (or P/B) for an ALS unit. In that case, no matter who is in the back, both parties share equal responsibility for patient care and the safety of the unit on the road. 
In the case that there is a third party (FF/FR driver), and both “techs” are in the back, the driver has no liability for patient care, but the techs are still responsible for the safety of the unit (not getting lost or in an accident). 
In the case that there is ONE EMT and a driver, that may change. I would assume that the driver shares 
From my limited understanding of Hatzolah (and my buddies who volunteer for them), most often there are two EMTs at a given scene, and they both “tech” the call—leaving minimum liability for the driver. At the same time, I understand that the drivers often have little or no medical training, which is not a good thing. Whatever the situation, the driver should not be sitting in the rig until the EMTs come out—they should be coming into the residence and helping…. But that’s a different topic. 
My last comment, going along with ffemt is that if the “Driver” is writing the PCR, they are signing it, and are thus responsible for it in court. I really understand little about Hatzolah, but know enough not to get involved in arguing about their policies (politics). I wish you well on your conquest to learn more. Please fill us in on anything you find out.


----------



## firecoins (Sep 7, 2008)

jordanfstop said:


> In my town there is an ambulance service you may all be aware of (Hatzolah [a VAS ran by Orthodox Jews.]) On Shabbos (the Sabbath) they pay non-Jewish drivers to drive their ambulances (I don't want to get into a debate of why they can drive their cars to the scene, but not the ambulance.) Basically the role of them (driver) is to wait around for a call, drive their car to the station, pick up the rig and take it to the scene where the EMTs will already be there in their POVs. The driver basically sits in the rig waiting for them to move the patient out of the house, opens any doors (that may involve using electricity) for them, drives the patient to the hospital, writes the PCR at the hospital, and drives the rig back to the station. The driver has minimal-to-no patient contact (and they mostly are speaking Yiddish to each other only.)
> 
> Now to the question, does the driver have any liability if pt tx goes against state protocol and the call gets called to court?



Normally the person who signs the document is responsible.  Howevedr this is Hatzolah we are talking about and nothing is done normally with those guys.


----------



## KEVD18 (Sep 7, 2008)

well i can tell you one thing: i wouldnt sign a pcr unless i teched the call.

in ma, at leat in region 4 and 5, you can never have anything less that two certified emts on a bus. they can be any combination of basics, intermediates and medic(with appropriate waivers) but you absolutely not have one emt and a non emt driver.


----------



## Flight-LP (Sep 7, 2008)

Ditto..........If I did not provide the care, then I do not sign. Its sad that NY allows uncertified personnel to drive. Having only one medic, an EMT-B at that, on emergency calls is just poor quality of care.............................


----------



## Flight-LP (Sep 7, 2008)

Besides, we all know anything related to NY or NJ EMS is a liability!


----------



## ffemt8978 (Sep 7, 2008)

Flight-LP said:


> Besides, we all know anything related to NY or NJ EMS is a liability!



Now that's funny, I don't care who you are.  :lol:


----------



## daedalus (Sep 7, 2008)

jordanfstop said:


> In my town there is an ambulance service you may all be aware of (Hatzolah [a VAS ran by Orthodox Jews.]) On Shabbos (the Sabbath) they pay non-Jewish drivers to drive their ambulances (I don't want to get into a debate of why they can drive their cars to the scene, but not the ambulance.) Basically the role of them (driver) is to wait around for a call, drive their car to the station, pick up the rig and take it to the scene where the EMTs will already be there in their POVs. The driver basically sits in the rig waiting for them to move the patient out of the house, opens any doors (that may involve using electricity) for them, drives the patient to the hospital, writes the PCR at the hospital, and drives the rig back to the station. The driver has minimal-to-no patient contact (and they mostly are speaking Yiddish to each other only.)
> 
> Now to the question, does the driver have any liability if pt tx goes against state protocol and the call gets called to court?


Uh, I want to know how this is even legal. Nothing against being Jewish or Israeli, but how is a religious group allowed to operate a private EMS response system that only caters to other Jews, responds in POV, and employs the use of non-medical persons? And another thing, why do the EMTs just staff the ambulance?


----------



## Flight-LP (Sep 7, 2008)

daedalus said:


> Uh, I want to know how this is even legal. Nothing against being Jewish or Israeli, but how is a religious group allowed to operate a private EMS response system that only caters to other Jews, responds in POV, and employs the use of non-medical persons? And another thing, why do the EMTs just staff the ambulance?



There is nothing illegal about a private group making its own rules. As they are not a public or goevernmental entity, they have every right to operate this way. No contesting that!

Unfortunately, NY has the belief that one medical provider is sufficient on an ambulance. It's not right, it is substandard, but the State says it's o.k. No contesting that either!

Don't like them, don't use 'em. Freedom of choice is great!


----------



## MAC4NH (Sep 7, 2008)

daedalus said:


> And another thing, why do the EMTs just staff the ambulance?



The original post was referring to staffing the unit during the Sabbath which is sundown Friday to sundown Saturday.  The rest of the week it is staffed by Jewish volunteers who, I believe, are generally EMTs.  During the Sabbath, Orthodox Jews are not supposed to do anything resembling work.  There are a number of different groups and the definition of work varies from group to group.  Apparently, in the group manning Hatzolah rendering aid is not work but driving the vehicle is.  I would love a post from someone involved with Hatzolah to clarify the situation because we have to deal with them occasionally here too.


----------



## medicdan (Sep 7, 2008)

MAC4NH said:


> I would love a post from someone involved with Hatzolah to clarify the situation because we have to deal with them occasionally here too.



A quick background, from someone who has watched Hatzolah from the background in several different settings. Again, please correct me if you find I am wrong. Hatzolah is an all volunteer ambulance service that is tasked with serving Orthodox Jewish communities. They have "chapters" all over NJ, NY, CA, Waterbury, CT, and Baltimore, MD, as well as Canada, Mexico, England, Israel, South Africa, Russia, Australia, etc. 

H exists as a "third-service" soliciting only emergency calls using a private dispatch number from members of the community and dispatching members from wherever they are. In principal, H can call in "mutual aid", that is the ambulance service naturally set up to cover the area, but as I understand it, they do very infrequently. 

Hatzolah claims that because of their volunteer-in-the-community model, they have excellent response times (they do!), and provide a higher (and more respectful) level of care to the orthodox Jews then would be provided elsewhere. During the week, they operate just like any other ambulance service, but their operations change on Shabbat (Friday night to Saturday night). On the Sabbath, Observant Jews are prohibited from performing any work, defined as lighting a fire (or using electricity, or driving for that matter), writing, carrying items from one domain to another, etc, except in the case of needing to save a life. 

Through enormously complicated discussions (that I simply don’t understand), each community has come to its own consensus about how things are done. In some communities, members can drive the ambulance TO the call (expecting to save a life), but then when they realize it isn’t threatening need to call in a non-Jew to drive to the hosp, others, the members will drive the ambulance to the hospital patient loaded, but then cannot drive the ambulance back to base or restock (because life is not at stake any more).
Nevertheless, Jews are never a group to keep things simple or easy, and in many communities clash with local authorities often. There were a set of articles in the newspaper about a year ago about a Hatzolah chapter in NJ who was issued $1500 in parking tickets by the LEOs in a 2-week period, for parking their ambulance around the corner from their station (I don’t want to get into the details…). If the chapters call for mutual aid, there are often disagreements between crews, although I hope patient care is never compromised. 

In Israel, Hatzolah exists slightly differently. MDA (Magen David Adom) provides all the ambulance service (First Response, transport, etc.), but in areas of high concentrations of Orthodox, Hatzolah supplements them. All Hatzolah members are trained, certified, monitored, etc. by MDA, and supplement them on scenes, either by arriving before the ambulance, augmenting MCI crews, or driving when both “techs” need to be in the back. Hatzolah supplies QRS motorcycles, supplies, equipment, etc to the communities to facilitate the quick response. In fact, some EMT/drivers for MDA are “on call” for Hatzolah when not at work, take an ambulance home with them at night, and take it to calls as a QRS before the on-call unit can get there (as well, to decrease the response time if there were to be an MCI). It’s a neat little system, but for the record, not without internal politics and strife. 

Hatzolah is generally looked at as a positive force in the EMS world. Non-Jewish ambulance services don’t need to get involved in these tight knit communities, don’t have to deal with the politics, etc. and the communities can usually fend for themselves. When called, Hatzolah ambulances do respond outside their service area (mutual aid), do provide quality patient care, and as I understand it, several Hatzolah chapters sent crews to WTC on 9/11/01. 

Sorry for the long post, please correct me if you find anything incorrect, and shoot me a PM if you have any questions.


----------



## daedalus (Sep 7, 2008)

Flight-LP said:


> There is nothing illegal about a private group making its own rules. As they are not a public or goevernmental entity, they have every right to operate this way. No contesting that!
> 
> Unfortunately, NY has the belief that one medical provider is sufficient on an ambulance. It's not right, it is substandard, but the State says it's o.k. No contesting that either!
> 
> Don't like them, don't use 'em. Freedom of choice is great!



Not in my minds eye do they have that right. Not when it comes to responding to emergencies. Being a paramedic, driving an emergency vehicle, responding to calls for assistance, etc, all are GOVERNMENT functions (or government contracted functions). Its also a matter of homeland security. If we let anyone operate their own public safety departments, whats to stop an extremist group from claiming a "right" to operate its own services and than drive code 3 past airport security and wreak havoc? Im sorry, wayyyyy to sketchy to me.


----------



## daedalus (Sep 7, 2008)

MAC4NH said:


> The original post was referring to staffing the unit during the Sabbath which is sundown Friday to sundown Saturday.  The rest of the week it is staffed by Jewish volunteers who, I believe, are generally EMTs.  During the Sabbath, Orthodox Jews are not supposed to do anything resembling work.  There are a number of different groups and the definition of work varies from group to group.  Apparently, in the group manning Hatzolah rendering aid is not work but driving the vehicle is.  I would love a post from someone involved with Hatzolah to clarify the situation because we have to deal with them occasionally here too.



Anyone refusing to "work" because of personal beliefs should not be operating an EMS system. The nature of public safety is 24hr/365 days.


----------



## MMiz (Sep 7, 2008)

I think many of you later posters are missing the point.  This ambulance service provides exceptional response times and care, but has adapted to ensure they can provide service that is congruent with their religious beliefs.  They provide service 24/7/365.

Their volunteers are trained to the EMT-Basic level, if not higher.  I really see no problem with a "driver" as long as their are two EMT-Basics on the rig.  *Many* volunteer and paid services across the nation have drivers who aren't even trained as EMT-Basics.  

Lets be honest, how many of your patients could be transported in a wheelchair van?  At the BLS level I'd venture to say that most of our non-emergency patients could use the service instead of a BLS ambulance.  Most wheelchair van drivers only have CPR/AED/O2 training.

I'm all for any private community-based service that lessens the burden on EMS.  The Hatzolah philosophy, at least what I can tell from reading a few websites, seems to work.  Community providers are providing competent medical care to sick and injured patients.  This does not replace 911, but compliments it.

I can't understand how having someone else sign your PCR is legal, but that's a whole separate issue.


----------



## MAC4NH (Sep 7, 2008)

daedalus said:


> Not in my minds eye do they have that right.



Well, the founding fathers kind of disagree with you.  The first line of the Bill of Rights states: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;."  I don't agree with everything Hatzolah does, but they do provide a necessary service for a community that is very insulated from the rest of society that might not otherwise have access to EMS (I have issues with that too but I refer to Bill of Rights, above).




> If we let anyone operate their own public safety departments, whats to stop an extremist group from claiming a "right" to operate its own services and than drive code 3 past airport security and wreak havoc? Im sorry, wayyyyy to sketchy to me.



Talk about wayyyy sketchy


----------



## daedalus (Sep 7, 2008)

I can break it down:

1. Deception: Older Jewish folks are going to innately have immense trust and respect for a jewish/socio-cultural ambulance service. So when grandpa is having chest pain, he has his wife call up Hatzohloa, instead of the JURISDICTIONAL 911 ALS provider. Turns out he was having an AMI, but the EMTs from the jewish ambulance could only bring him to a local community hospital, without thrombolytics or a cath lab. He dies in the ICU after having to wait for a transport to a STEMI receiving hospital. An ALS ambulance could have transported him right to the STEMI center with a positive Dx from a 12 lead, and the patient could have been cathed under 90 minutes. The older jewish man is taught to trust the jewish ambulance, and he has no idea what ALS or BLS is, let alone the differences between the two. Some of you may try and argue that the EMTs might have called for an ALS mutual aid. What if his presentation was non-typical? Simple mild dyspnea with adb discomfort. 

2. In a lot areas (including LA county, check protocol called "Transport and Destination" online) it is against the law for a private service to take emergency calls and dispatch a unit to a citizen's call for help (unless that service is a contracted 911 provider, and the patient is within their jurisdiction). If a private non contracted service receives a request for medical aid, they are required to tell the caller to dial 911 instead here in LA county. Even if this is not the law in your area, it is at least unethical to take private emergency calls. What if the call required heavy rescue or law enforcement? If the caller called 911 instead, the dispatcher would be able to professionally glean the information and send the appropriate response including Fire and PD. You may say the EMTs may be able to request these services from on scene, but you know that if the caller had dialed 911, all the services would have been dispatched ASAP.

3. Homeland security issues already mentioned. We as a society must regulate use of emergency vehicles.

If the Hatzolah wants to provide inter-facility wheel chair van services that treat the sick and dying jewish with respect, thats a wonderful and amazing thing. Otherwise, its just monkey business providing emergency response. Come on...


----------



## daedalus (Sep 7, 2008)

MAC4NH said:


> Well, the founding fathers kind of disagree with you.  The first line of the Bill of Rights states: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;."  I don't agree with everything Hatzolah does, but they do provide a necessary service for a community that is very insulated from the rest of society that might not otherwise have access to EMS (I have issues with that too but I refer to Bill of Rights, above).
> 
> 
> 
> ...



You can use google, and research *case law* regarding the rights of religions, and than also google legal opinions written about the subject, and find that free exercise has a very limited meaning. Imagine if my religion stated that sacrificing humans was acceptable? Does the Bill of rights cover me? Maybe thats a little extreme. Would the bill of rights cover my church if it decided to run its own police department to enforce the law in surrounding communities? Absolutely not.

Here, I did some of the work for you. I





> In 1879, the Supreme Court was first called to interpret the extent of the free exercise clause in Reynolds v. United States, as related to the prosecution of polygamy under federal law. The Supreme Court upheld the conviction, deciding that to do otherwise would provide constitutional protection for a gamut of religious beliefs, including those as extreme as human sacrifice. *The Court said, "Laws are made for the government of actions, and while they cannot interfere with mere religious beliefs and opinions, they may with practices."*


-Hamilton, Marci A. (2005). God vs. the Gavel: Religion and the Rule of Law. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. ISBN 0521853044.

What the supreme court said was that the first amendment applies to ideas and thoughts, not actions.


----------



## firecoins (Sep 7, 2008)

daedalus said:


> Not in my minds eye do they have that right. Not when it comes to responding to emergencies. Being a paramedic, driving an emergency vehicle, responding to calls for assistance, etc, all are GOVERNMENT functions (or government contracted functions). Its also a matter of homeland security. If we let anyone operate their own public safety departments, whats to stop an extremist group from claiming a "right" to operate its own services and than drive code 3 past airport security and wreak havoc? Im sorry, wayyyyy to sketchy to me.



First non governmental ambulance services exist and are completly legal.  They do have the right to go code 3. And no they don't blow through airport security when they do it. 

2nd The 1st amendment provides religious freedom. And this is a religious organization providing services to a religious group.  Its members do not call 911 and would not call 911. Although they have the opition of doing so, they choose not to.  

Hatzolah has every right to exist as ambulance service for Hasidic Jews.


----------



## firecoins (Sep 7, 2008)

daedalus said:


> You can use google, and research *case law* regarding the rights of religions, and than also google legal opinions written about the subject, and find that free exercise has a very limited meaning. \.



That limited meaning does not oppose private ambulance service. Sorry.  Hatzolah legally exists.


----------



## daedalus (Sep 7, 2008)

firecoins said:


> That limited meaning does not oppose private ambulance service. Sorry.  Hatzolah legally exists.


That was not my point, at this point I am trying to educate the other poster about the meaning of the first amendment. If you read the ruling made by the Justices of the Supreme Court, you will see that it only applies to *idea and beliefs.
* The law, whether US code, state statutes, or local ordinances, NEVER are all inclusive to the point that they specifically mention or exclude every possibility. Thats why judges and the legal system exist, to interpret the law. As stated, the Bill of Rights ONLY applies to ideas and beliefs. Actions (such as starting an ambulance service) are not guaranteed to you as a right, and therefor, are restricted actions based on laws, and yes, even by opinions of others like myself. The government guarantees you no right to run your own ambulance service, just as the government guarantees you no right to start a pharmaceutical company. Its silliness. You have to follow all applicable laws since it is not a guaranteed right, and since I am alive and a citizen, I can work to change those laws.

The other poster was under the impression that the bill of rights gave Hatzolah permission to run an EMS service. Thats not correct. They may still sun a service legally, but its not a guaranteed right. I hope your now understanding.


----------



## MAC4NH (Sep 7, 2008)

daedalus said:


> What the supreme court said was that the first amendment applies to ideas and thoughts, not actions.



I never in my life thought I'd be defending Hatzolah but here goes:  They are state certified EMT's who practice to the standard of care for the states in which they are certified.  In NY and NJ, most ALS does not transport!  Hatzolah does call ALS when indicated and does use ALS providers as required by the state's standard of care  (BTW: don't even start about our BLS/ALS system. It works well based on our geography and our politics.  That's not what this thread is about). So the old jewish man with the STEMI from your example is getting the same level of care as anyone calling 911.  The reason the orthodox communities call Hatzolah is that they have many religious rules and rituals involving death that they do not want broken and Hatzolah understands and honors those rules.  It's all perfectly legal and medically ethical based on local standards.  The issue in the thread is about the liability of a driver that does not perform patient care.  

Remember that this is a very large country what's perfectly natural for you in California may be totally alien out here in the East.  We all follow the same basic standards on a national level but nuts and bolts protocols are still done locally.


----------



## daedalus (Sep 7, 2008)

firecoins said:


> First non governmental ambulance services exist and are completly legal.  They do have the right to go code 3. And no they don't blow through airport security when they do it.
> 
> Still off a little. Private ambulance services can only go code three while following local and state laws regarding their usages. For example, in LA county, a private ambulance cannot be dispatched code three to a residence.
> (With one notable exception, and that is when requested to go go three by the local fire department).


----------



## daedalus (Sep 7, 2008)

MAC4NH said:


> I never in my life thought I'd be defending Hatzolah but here goes:  They are state certified EMT's who practice to the standard of care for the states in which they are certified.  In NY and NJ, most ALS does not transport!  Hatzolah does call ALS when indicated and does use ALS providers as required by the state's standard of care  (BTW: don't even start about our BLS/ALS system. It works well based on our geography and our politics.  That's not what this thread is about). So the old jewish man with the STEMI from your example is getting the same level of care as anyone calling 911.  The reason the orthodox communities call Hatzolah is that they have many religious rules and rituals involving death that they do not want broken and Hatzolah understands and honors those rules.  It's all perfectly legal and medically ethical based on local standards.  The issue in the thread is about the liability of a driver that does not perform patient care.
> 
> Remember that this is a very large country what's perfectly natural for you in California may be totally alien out here in the East.  We all follow the same basic standards on a national level but nuts and bolts protocols are still done locally.



I agree with you to a point. In my views on things, its not an acceptable practice, but those are my views, and I am not a EMSA administrator for your area so I would not worry 

Im glad it works for you. And as for the OP, I would never sign a PCR in the stated situation. 

**side point** we have to be smart when claiming rights from the government. For example, try walking into a mall with a shirt on that contains multiple profanities. Than, try explaining your right to free speech to the guard throwing you out. He will have a chuckle, and than proceed to throw you out. Try posting things here that break the rules, and claim your right to free expression of speech. Watch your post be deleted anyways. You need to know when your rights apply, and, when they do not.


----------



## TheAfterAffect (Sep 7, 2008)

There have been many other issues in the past with Hatzolah, So if you were asking this question in regards to possibly doing the driver position, It wouldn't be reccomended. 

Hatzolah has had a few court cases also because of their "explicit" catering to ONLY jewish PT's. A year or two ago one of the Hatzolah Chapters was brought to court because they passed a MVA with a few severly injured PT's (They didnt even radio in the MVA or stop to see if they were more needed there) because they were on their way to pick up a Rabbi, that for all intensive purposes, Stubbed his toe.


----------



## JPINFV (Sep 7, 2008)

MAC4NH said:


> Well, the founding fathers kind of disagree with you.  The first line of the Bill of Rights states: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;."  I don't agree with everything Hatzolah does, but they do provide a necessary service for a community that is very insulated from the rest of society that might not otherwise have access to EMS (I have issues with that too but I refer to Bill of Rights, above).



There are still limits that can be placed. Their religion does not dictate that they run an EMS service, therefore the first amendment does not protect Hatzolah from being regulated by government agencies. Similarly, just like the rest of the first amendment, there are always limitations that can be put in place. Just as you 'can't yell fire in a theater,' there are other restrictions that can be placed on religions (who wants to bet that something like the Inquisition would fly today because of "religious freedom?").


----------



## MMiz (Sep 7, 2008)

No one is saying that Hatzolah is not being regulated by the government, in fact they often work with the government for the common good of the communities they serve.

I really know nothing about the service beyond what I've read on the internet in my searches related to this thread, but this seems to me like a neighborhood initiative that is so common in "the old country."  The neighborhood comes together to reach common goals and provide services.  I'm sure there are politics and quite a few people who disagree with the service, but I can't fault a community organization for trying to better meet the needs of the community.


----------



## ffemt8978 (Sep 7, 2008)

daedalus said:


> I can break it down:
> 
> 1. Deception: Older Jewish folks are going to innately have immense trust and respect for a jewish/socio-cultural ambulance service. So when grandpa is having chest pain, he has his wife call up Hatzohloa, instead of the JURISDICTIONAL 911 ALS provider. Turns out he was having an AMI, but the EMTs from the jewish ambulance could only bring him to a local community hospital, without thrombolytics or a cath lab. He dies in the ICU after having to wait for a transport to a STEMI receiving hospital. An ALS ambulance could have transported him right to the STEMI center with a positive Dx from a 12 lead, and the patient could have been cathed under 90 minutes. The older jewish man is taught to trust the jewish ambulance, and he has no idea what ALS or BLS is, let alone the differences between the two. Some of you may try and argue that the EMTs might have called for an ALS mutual aid. What if his presentation was non-typical? Simple mild dyspnea with adb discomfort.



And that is different that the rest of the rural and remote ambulance services across the country how?  



daedalus said:


> 2. In a lot areas (including LA county, check protocol called "Transport and Destination" online) it is against the law for a private service to take emergency calls and dispatch a unit to a citizen's call for help (unless that service is a contracted 911 provider, and the patient is within their jurisdiction). If a private non contracted service receives a request for medical aid, they are required to tell the caller to dial 911 instead here in LA county. Even if this is not the law in your area, it is at least unethical to take private emergency calls. What if the call required heavy rescue or law enforcement? If the caller called 911 instead, the dispatcher would be able to professionally glean the information and send the appropriate response including Fire and PD. You may say the EMTs may be able to request these services from on scene, but you know that if the caller had dialed 911, all the services would have been dispatched ASAP.


Based upon this response earlier in the thread, it appears as if it is the patient's choice to contact this service...as is their right to chose their healthcare providers.


emt-student said:


> H exists as a "third-service" soliciting only emergency calls using a private dispatch number from members of the community and dispatching members from wherever they are. In principal, H can call in "mutual aid", that is the ambulance service naturally set up to cover the area, but as I understand it, they do very infrequently.


  Or would you rather deny the patient their choice of providers just because they don't have a three digit phone number?



daedalus said:


> 3. Homeland security issues already mentioned. We as a society must regulate use of emergency vehicles.
> 
> If the Hatzolah wants to provide inter-facility wheel chair van services that treat the sick and dying jewish with respect, thats a wonderful and amazing thing. Otherwise, its just monkey business providing emergency response. Come on...


  Where does it say that a patient can't choose their own ambulance company?  Any part of state, federal or even Medicare/Medicaid?  What qualifies any 911 provider as being better than a service like this?  They have the same equipment as a 911 agency certified to their same level, their personel must meet the same training standards, and they must all follow the same guidelines.  They also have the additional ability to uderstand, respect, and operate within a very secular part of our society.  To me, this is a good thing.





daedalus said:


> Not in my minds eye do they have that right. Not when it comes to responding to emergencies. Being a paramedic, driving an emergency vehicle, responding to calls for assistance, etc, all are GOVERNMENT functions (or government contracted functions). Its also a matter of homeland security. If we let anyone operate their own public safety departments, whats to stop an extremist group from claiming a "right" to operate its own services and than drive code 3 past airport security and wreak havoc? Im sorry, wayyyyy to sketchy to me.


I'm not even going to address your "Homeland security" concerns as they appear to be nothing more than an attempt to sensationilze your viewpoint but I will say this...there are hundreds of private ambulance companies that do 911 and interfacility work that are equiped, authorized, and do run code 3.  911 agencies do not have a lock on this ability.  As a matter of fact, the non-emergent services I have seen tend to have better driving habits when driving code because they don't do it as often and tend to be more careful about it.  (On a side note, I'd be interested to see what the accident percentages are when comparing 911 and non emergent services driving code 3).


----------



## emt19723 (Sep 7, 2008)

jordanfstop said:


> In my town there is an ambulance service you may all be aware of (Hatzolah [a VAS ran by Orthodox Jews.]) On Shabbos (the Sabbath) they pay non-Jewish drivers to drive their ambulances (I don't want to get into a debate of why they can drive their cars to the scene, but not the ambulance.) Basically the role of them (driver) is to wait around for a call, drive their car to the station, pick up the rig and take it to the scene where the EMTs will already be there in their POVs. The driver basically sits in the rig waiting for them to move the patient out of the house, opens any doors (that may involve using electricity) for them, drives the patient to the hospital, writes the PCR at the hospital, and drives the rig back to the station. The driver has minimal-to-no patient contact (and they mostly are speaking Yiddish to each other only.)
> 
> Now to the question, does the driver have any liability if pt tx goes against state protocol and the call gets called to court?




bet me id have ANYTHING to do with that PCR.    lol     and as far as the NY and NJ EMS being a liability.....that was funny!!!


----------



## daedalus (Sep 7, 2008)

ffemt8978 said:


> I'm not even going to address your "Homeland security" concerns as they appear to be nothing more than an attempt to sensationilze your viewpoint but I will say this...there are hundreds of private ambulance companies that do 911 and interfacility work that are equiped, authorized, and do run code 3.  911 agencies do not have a lock on this ability.  As a matter of fact, the non-emergent services I have seen tend to have better driving habits when driving code because they don't do it as often and tend to be more careful about it.  (On a side note, I'd be interested to see what the accident percentages are when comparing 911 and non emergent services driving code 3).



I appreciate your argument, however; A private company is a legally chartered organization with a purpose: to make money.  They work under the laws established to provide services for a cost, and pay their employees. The frequently employee attorneys, MBAs, and MDs to help oversee their business and have a stake in following the rules (continue making money). They are also under public scrutiny for every mistake they make (do you think Haztolah is too?). 

A volunteer EMS organization is chartered as a community service, not a device to further a culture. The same applies.

I am not the first one to bring up the topic of the dangers of ambulance theft and or illegal use. The Dept. of Homeland Security has the same fears. So does Britain http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/2217076/Al-Qa'eda-style-terrorists-planning-UK-attacks-with-ambulances-bought-on-eBay.html


----------



## firecoins (Sep 7, 2008)

[


JPINFV said:


> There are still limits that can be placed. Their religion does not dictate that they run an EMS service, therefore the first amendment does not protect Hatzolah from being regulated by government agencies.


 They are regulated by gov't agencies.  And they are legal.They still can do code 3 response.

.


----------



## daedalus (Sep 7, 2008)

firecoins said:


> [
> They are regulated by gov't agencies.  And they are legal.They still can do code 3 response.
> 
> .


How about trying to make an intelligent argument instead of assembling a few words into a poorly structured sentence. I understand they are allowed to run an ambulance, but why don't you try and find sources to back up your claims instead of an making such a response? Firecoins, I understand what you are sayin , but you are not hearing what I am saying.


----------



## firecoins (Sep 7, 2008)

daedalus said:


> A volunteer EMS organization is chartered as a community service, not a device to further a culture. The same applies.



hatzolah does not "further" a culture. It is a charted EMS organization that provides a community service to Hasidic Jews who would not call 911 for medical emergencies.  They are allowed to decide who provides medical care in their own comminty.  Homeland Security does not override this decision.



> I am not the first one to bring up the topic of the dangers of ambulance theft and or illegal use. The Dept. of Homeland Security has the same fears. [/URL]



Homeland Security can not and should not decide who can run an ambulance service and who can not. While there is a danger of ambulances can be stolen by terrorists this has as much application to ALL ambulance services. I fail to see this a legitimate argument on why Hatzolah is should not exist.


----------



## firecoins (Sep 7, 2008)

daedalus said:


> How about trying to make an intelligent argument instead of assembling a few words into a poorly structured sentence. I understand they are allowed to run an ambulance, but why don't you try and find sources to back up your claims instead of an making such a response? Firecoins, I understand what you are sayin , but you are not hearing what I am saying.



I have made an intelligent argument instead the b.s. your putting foward. The constitution of the United States pretty backs me up.  Homeland Securty does not decide which group an ambulance and which group can't. They are afraid ambulances can be used as weapons so religious Jews can't have their own ambulance?  Good argmuent!


----------



## medicdan (Sep 7, 2008)

Double post. SORRY!


----------



## daedalus (Sep 7, 2008)

firecoins said:


> I have made an intelligent argument instead the b.s. your putting foward. The constitution of the United States pretty backs me up.  Homeland Securty does not decide which group an ambulance and which group can't. They are afraid ambulances can be used as weapons so religious Jews can't have their own ambulance?  Good argmuent!


Straw man argument.

Firecoins, where in the constitution are you seeing support for your argument? The constitution is a legal document giving the US government its powers. The citizens of the US empower the government to make certain decisions to further public safety. State side homeland Security is well well within its power to regulate the use of emergency vehicles. I am not putting forward BS, I am making arguments and backing them up with authoritative sources. Lets remember you and I are both people here and probably would be friends if we met in person so lets keep it civil.


----------



## firecoins (Sep 7, 2008)

daedalus said:


> Firecoins, where in the constitution are you seeing support for your argument? The constitution is a legal document giving the US government its powers. The citizens of the US empower the government to make certain decisions to further public safety. State side homeland Security is well well within its power to regulate the use of emergency vehicles. I am not putting forward BS, I am making arguments and backing them up with authoritative sources. Lets remember you and I are both people here and probably would be friends if we met in person so lets keep it civil.



The constituion separates both state and federal powers and LIMITS that power.   

1. Homeland Security does not regulate ambulances. The Department of Transportation provides minimum regulations.  Check in your EMT book if you still have it.

2. State rights are in the constituion. Each individual state regulates ambulances that operate with in that state. NY and NJ have both authorized Hatzolah to operate.  Dept. of Homeland Security has no right to come in make those decisions for NY and NJ.

3. the 1st amendment prevents the government from interfering with religion. Running an ambulance service for a religious community does not infringe on anyone else for the Federal government to come in and disolve it.  

4. Picking out the Hasidic Jewish communties as not being able to run their own ambulances is discriminatory in nature countering Federal civil rights laws.

5.  Why are Hatzolah ambulances more of a threat than other ambulances? 
It is not hard for a "terrorist" to get hired as an EMT-B and steal an ambulance from a commercial or volunteer agency.  The EMT class is only 150 hours and costs less than flight training. Or such a person could just wait at an ER and take one.  Why is Hatzolah more suspectible to an ambulance being stolen?  It is no way difficult to steal an ambulance from even government agencies.

I live in a county that Hatzolah operates.  I am hardly their biggest fan.  But they have a time and place


----------



## KEVD18 (Sep 7, 2008)

you know, i can pretty much guarantee that if i took a bigger part in this thread, it would already be on a time out.

yet i abstain and the arguments run rampant.

i think im being discriminated against......


j/k cl's. j/k.


----------



## ffemt8978 (Sep 7, 2008)

KEVD18 said:


> you know, i can pretty much guarantee that if i took a bigger part in this thread, it would already be on a time out.
> 
> yet i abstain and the arguments run rampant.
> 
> ...



Actually, I hadn't read this thread since I last posted in it.

But now that I'm here







This thread is heading in a very bad direction so it is on a 24 time out.


----------



## Jon (Sep 8, 2008)

Wow.

I take a day off and I miss this thread. Wow.


OK... I'll self identify... I'm Jew-ish... (that is to say I was raised in Conservative Judisam, now vote Conservative, try to eat to the general principals of the laws of kashruit, and occasionally go to Shul - but with school every Saturday morning, it isn't easy. (Yeah... who else would find a way to link Fiddler on the Roof to a discussion on Volunteering).


In Philadelphia, there are several Russian-American owned ambulance companies that cater to a very large population of Russian and Ukrainian born 1st generation immigrants to Philly. Additionally, many of the involved are Jewish, because the socio-political views of communism made being a Jew in the USSR difficult... so they left.

Anyway... these "Russian Ambulance Companies" do a lot of the standard transport work... Dialysis, Dr's appointments, etc. Their customers are often foreign born, and many of their drivers and EMT's were raised in the same community, and many are fluent in Yiddish, Russian, or other regional dialects, therefore they have an easier time communicating with the patients.

These companies advertise at community fairs and festivals, and look for customers. They also distribute business card magnets with their phone number and accept emergency calls from residences - because this community is more comfortable reaching out and getting help from people who speak their own language and know the local culture. (Of course, not all of the crews really work for that... like the time PARescueEMT and myself took one of these residence calls in my short tenure with the one company - we both ONLY speak English).


Anyway... long story short - they operate state-certified BLS ambulances. There is at least one service that operates ALS rigs. Philly says that no one except the City's Fire Rescue is supposed to do emergency prehospital calls... but the city is so busy that no one cares if this population works it out themselves like this, within reason.

I think the big difference between the Philly "Russian Ambulance Companies" and Hatzola is that Hatzola simply dedicates itself to serving a small segment of the population's prehospital EMS needs, while the Philly companies usually do routine transports within and outside the small group, BUT they will do emergent prehosptial runs when asked. Further, the "Russian" companies aren't religion based... yes, there are lots of Jews in the population segment, but their are lots of other religions too.



I don't have any issue with Hatzola functioning to serve a small population segment that would otherwise be underserved. I won't attempt to justify the cases of them failing to render aid when flagged down. I assume they have some sort of mutual aid agreement/M.O.U. in place with the local 911 service(s)... that is an issue that must be handled locally.

Deeply religious Jews have many rules about how and what they wear, how and what they do, and when they do it. And it is all traditions. These have evolved over the years as technology has changed, but they are very limited in what they do.

One way of explaining some of the Jewish cultural mores is that over the years, the religious thinkers have built a wall AROUND the rules, so there is no risk of violating them accidentally.

However... most of the rules go out the window "to protect life".




Going back to the OP's question - you say that the "driver" doesn't provide patient care, and simply drives the ambulance and opens power doors for the crew - but he writes the chart (because writing is creating and work and work isn't allowed, because G-D rested on the 7th day).

What is the rules with the state regarding when a chart must be completed? PA has a 24-hour limit, officially, but that is somewhat flexible. Around here, I'd suggest that the driver would gather patient demographics, then the EMS providers would be responsible to stopping by the station after the day to write the narrative and sign the paperwork.

Again... Going back to the OP's question... if all you are doing is driving... and you have minimal to any patient contact, then you probably have limited to no liability.

If you are documenting the call.... your liability increases. If something goes wrong, the providers and the patient could probably both jam you up... because you didn't have lots of patient contact. I think this is a great question to take to the state OEMS and get their opinion.



OK... this topic is reopened... try to keep it on topic... based on the OP's question.

Jon


----------



## BossyCow (Sep 8, 2008)

I believe the difference here is that when a private group decides to offer a service to a select clientele, that is very different from a government agency refusing care to a select group. In this case, as with some catholic hospitals, private schools, fraternal organizations, etc, a service is offered to members. I don't see how this in any way impedes the delivery of a munincipal service to its service area. 

If a service is offered to a geographic area, through any group, and it does not replace but merely augments services currently available through a civil service, and the citizenry is able to choose between the two, I can't see a constitutional challenge. Currently we can choose to call 911 and get the local agency to transport us to the ER or we can opt to call any of a dozen different private ambulance companies, caregiver services or to have Aunt Mabel drive us in her car. 

Many conservative groups are wary of public services and to have a service available to them that understands the restrictions of their lifestyle is something I see as accomodating and helpful, since the alternative in many of these cases would be not calling for help at all until things are much, much worse.

As to the liability, if you sign the report, you are the one to defend it in court should it go there.


----------



## firecoins (Sep 8, 2008)

BossyCow said:


> As to the liability, if you sign the report, you are the one to defend it in court should it go there.



Generally this is true.  Here is where a "shabbas driver " differs. The whole point of Hatzolah is that Hasidic Jews provide their own care. The driver is not Jewish.  He is hired to do all the work the employers are not allowed to do including writing the report. The hasidic Jews are allowed to provide the care since it is a "mitzvah" to do so.  If there is a lawsuit, it is understood the driver did not provide the care since he is not apart of the community.  It would be very hard to argue he is responsible for the care that he is not allowed to provide due to the customs of the community.  Although I am sure a good attorney might be able to do so.


----------



## Jon (Sep 8, 2008)

Do the providers ALSO sign the report at some point, after sundown Saturday?


----------



## daedalus (Sep 8, 2008)

The EMTs providing care are EMTs first, and members of the Jewish community second (It is however, a wonderful thing that they provide jewish sensitive care. However, in medicine, your responsibility is shifted). They must operate under that standards of care, and, follow all prehospital rules. They must write the report if they are providing care. The driver with no medical responsibility cannot fill out a narrative or assessment information. The driver would incur huge liability, and possibly be breaking the law. 

Remember that we set aside religious and personal beliefs to provide impartial and objective care for our patients. We must respect the will and the values of the patient (for example, not giving a blood transfusion to certain religious  grouped patients, etc) but must never assume we know whats best for the patient by disregarding their beliefs, or, by failing to ask and withholding certain treatments anyways. We follow the pillars of medicine, and give care to the level and ability we are supposed to. That includes writing the report. If you cannot document as an EMT for whatever reason, you cannot be an EMT.


----------



## mikie (Sep 8, 2008)

TheAfterAffect said:


> Hatzolah has had a few court cases also because of their "explicit" catering to ONLY jewish PT's.



Well, we are the _chosen people_


----------



## John E (Sep 8, 2008)

*Hope this comes across...*

in the spirit in which it is meant, which is simply what I consider a humorous observation.

Here in Los Angeles there are a few Orthodox synagogues that have come up with I can only describe as an interesting interpretation of their own rules.

It seems that some people believe that traveling beyond the boundaries of I guess the synagogue or perhaps the shul on the sabbath is verboten, in order to facilitate having to do that, these well meaning folks have strung very long pieces of high strength fishing line around neighborhoods, apparently if the area that the people want to travel in is within the borders of the fishing line, it is now ok to do so on the sabbath. What happens when the line breaks, god only knows...

Now I can appreciate that people put their faith in whatever they want and I can see that to some, obeying what they interpret as god's laws is very important to them, but I have to wonder. Do they think that god will think them clever for "getting over" on him/her and the rules?

Likewise with rules regarding working on the sabbath, do the folks who observe/believe in this particular notion think that they're getting away with something if they get a goyim to do their work for them one day per week?

Would a god that laid down all of the various rules and laws about how best to honor and obey him/her really not consider the various loopholes that the faithful have tried to squeeze thru?

I am in no way trying to belittle or denigrate anyone's beliefs, I simply find it very amusing. And before anyone goes crazy, yes, I understand that every  form of organised religion has their own set of rules that the faithful feel that they must follow, I'm not picking on the Orthodox Jews of the world. 

As for the specific questions raised earlier, how can a person write a report and sign it without having done the work and expect NOT to get named in the lawsuit that will invariably follow? If I don't treat, I don't sign and I'd be shocked to learn that this is allowed by law anywhere, it may be done and it may be overlooked but I bet it ain't technically legal to do so. 

John E.


----------



## medicdan (Sep 8, 2008)

Okay, quick response, to the past few comments:
We've heard plenty of speculation and stories about how things have been done-- and specific stories-- I will try to find some definitive evidence of it. As I see it, these anecdotes are purely theoretical, until we can find some evidence.  There used to be a great forum related to Hatzolah on the web, but it seems to be down right now. I will ask around and see if I can find some definitive answers....

John-- a quick clarification, and again, I will leave the real explanation to those who can give deeper background. Orthodox Jewish law (Halacha) prohibits work, including carrying or moving items "from one domain to another" on the Sabbath-- that is, it’s okay to carry things around your house, but not around the block (under normal circumstances). Thus, so families can carry house keys, push baby-carriages, etc, they turn their entire community into a domain by stringing a line or wire around it. 
For more information about "eruvim" see the link below, it includes a good history:
http://bostoneruv.org/history.htm
I will reiterate, based on my understanding of Hatzolah, on the Sabbath, the members are permitted to perform whatever functions are necessary to save/maintain life. As I understand it from the Hatzolah members I have spoken with many chapters interpret hospital's requests for completed paperwork before leaving the ER as a requirement for the health/safety of the patient, thus requiring crews to complete paperwork before coming back in service. 

For those that find it hard to understand the idea of a private community ambulance, compare it to college campus EMS. A small, often volunteer, but professionally trained/equipped/licensed QRS or ambulance service dedicated to a specific community. They have specific knowledge of the community, whether it be building locations and access or even cultural and societal norms. No, they do not denigrate the service zone of whoever normally would cover that area--- they supplement/augment, and keep those trucks available for other calls.


----------



## JPINFV (Sep 9, 2008)

emt-student said:


> John-- a quick clarification, and again, I will leave the real explanation to those who can give deeper background. Orthodox Jewish law (Halacha) prohibits work, including carrying or moving items "from one domain to another" on the Sabbath-- that is, it’s okay to carry things around your house, but not around the block (under normal circumstances). Thus, so families can carry house keys, push baby-carriages, etc, they turn their entire community into a domain by stringing a line or wire around it.
> For more information about "eruvim" see the link below, it includes a good history:
> http://bostoneruv.org/history.htm



Why does the entire concept of an Eruvim seem like a cop out (and too be honest, I'm just as harsh on my own religion. [cough Lent and no meat rule, but fish is somehow ok?]. If the entire concept of the sabbath is to be a day of rest, and to achieve such certain rules are put in place, isn't essentially the concept of the eruvim (based on the link provided) playing a game of legal gotcha with God?


----------



## Meursault (Sep 9, 2008)

emt-student said:


> For those that find it hard to understand the idea of a private community ambulance, compare it to college campus EMS. A small, often volunteer, but professionally trained/equipped/licensed QRS or ambulance service dedicated to a specific community. They have specific knowledge of the community, whether it be building locations and access or even cultural and societal norms. No, they do not denigrate the service zone of whoever normally would cover that area--- they supplement/augment, and keep those trucks available for other calls.



That's a great description.
My college service probably has some crossover with Hatzolah, actually. I know we train a lot of people for MDA before they go over/back, and there's a Hatzolah sticker in the office. Might have to ask around.

And FFS, people, this was as bad as a volly thread. What happened? (rhetorical question)


----------



## ffemt8978 (Sep 9, 2008)

MrConspiracy said:


> That's a great description.
> My college service probably has some crossover with Hatzolah, actually. I know we train a lot of people for MDA before they go over/back, and there's a Hatzolah sticker in the office. Might have to ask around.
> 
> And FFS, people, this was as bad as a volly thread. What happened? (rhetorical question)



I agree, so can we get back on topic please?  If this thread gets closed again, it won't be reopened.


----------



## firecoins (Sep 9, 2008)

Not all Hatzolah unit play by the same rules.  

The Shabbas Driver concept is not used universally.  

Some Hatzoalh units can drive to an emergency scene, turn on and off electrical equipment, lift patients in and out of the ambulance, drice to the hospital, write the report and drive home.  

Others can not write the report or drive home.  Once the patient is delivered to the ER, they feel the are not allowed to do anything anymore. They can't write the report and they can't drive home. 

Maybe it stupid stuff like this that has driven me atheism.


----------



## BLSBoy (Sep 9, 2008)

This quote is somewhat fitting...


> Hokey religions and ancient weapons are no match for a good blaster at your side, kid.



If the Jewish population wants to be served by just other Jews, fine, knock yourself out. No skin off my butt. 
They want to try to avoid electronics, fine no skin off my butt. 

There is no law, to date, in the good ol US of A that prevents stupidity, no matter how well intentioned it may be.  

Some idiot EMT, who wants to make a few extra bucks, is their porter, chauffer, scribe, and general gofer, knock yourself out. When the PCR comes back more jacked up then a soup sandwich, ain't no skin of my butt. 

Although they are trying to live like the old country, this ain't the old country. 

And yes, I have the same attitude towards Amish. I respect you for trying, but laugh at you for picking something so useless in a technologically advanced society.


----------



## firecoins (Sep 9, 2008)

Alot of things don't take skin off you butt.  Should try expand things that keep yoor butt and skin together. :unsure:


----------



## mikie (Sep 9, 2008)

BLSBoy said:


> And yes, I have the same attitude towards Amish. I respect you for trying, but



This is not the same as the Amish...at all.  Not using electricity as a means of worshiping god on the sabbath is not the same as the "ol'e country' (as you referred to it).  Different cultures, different background, different history, so on an so forth.  

Carry on


----------



## lalifeguards (Feb 5, 2010)

*I can clarify*

I can clarify quite a few things in this thread if anyone is still interested. I am very knowledgeable how Hatzolah works, and the rules of Shabbath.


----------



## MrBrown (Feb 5, 2010)

From a strictly legal point of view, where is EMSLaw when you need him?


----------



## firecoins (Feb 5, 2010)

THis is a dead thread


----------



## EMSLaw (Feb 5, 2010)

MrBrown said:


> From a strictly legal point of view, where is EMSLaw when you need him?



You rang?


----------



## emt seeking first job (Aug 2, 2010)

firecoins said:


> normally the person who signs the document is responsible.  Howevedr this is hatzolah we are talking about and nothing is done normally with those guys.




that is an understatement.


----------



## Sassafras (Aug 2, 2010)

Nevermind, I didn't realize this was a long dead thread that had just been revitalized.


----------



## ffemt8978 (Aug 2, 2010)

Sassafras said:


> Nevermind, I didn't realize this was a long dead thread that had just been revitalized.



Agreed.  Thread closed since this is the third one today about this agency.  For further discussion, go here... http://www.emtlife.com/showthread.php?t=19251


----------

