Concerned about Adminstering Diastat

[triemal04]

Blahblahblahblahblah...christ it's like a broken record. Repeated for it's importance:

Unfortunately I've seen many of my teaching colleagues partake in the legal system due to their actions and acts of what I see as goodwill. It's essential for both my career and my well being that I ensure the safety of not only my students, but also myself.

Really, that's the end of the discussion. The only important thing to take away from this is that Matt needs to discuss this issue with people who know and are familiar with the law IN HIS STATE, and have experience with this type of issue IN HIS STATE. Anything else, while interesting and worth knowing, does not fully help with the issue he's facing.

 

[triemal04]

For the record, if you are allowed by your school and state laws to administer insulin, glucagon, epi and others to your students when needed, and are comfortable in doing so, then giving diastat shouldn't be an issue. If it's a comfort issue then you should have all the tools needed to learn about it's uses, route of admin, indications, contraindications and so forth so that's easily fixed.

If it's a concern about the liability issue...that's something you'll need to look into on your own and is particular to your state. Even if you aren't technically covered by state law, if you have the full support of your school/district, that should go a long way towards helping if it were to go to trial. Especially if you used the med in the appropriate way.

It's also personal issue; not necessarily an ethical one or moral, but along those lines; with your state not giving you protection to give a med during an emergency, and unless there is some other statute that protects you due to your job, it will come down to whether or not you are willing to risk your livelihood for a student.

 

[daedalus]

I once attended a special campus in high school run by the local school district, because I wanted to attend a CISCO computer networking class. The staff there was forbidden to do first aid, CPR, or even call 911 in a medical emergency. We had to sign a waiver that said if we had a medical emergency on campus, 911 would not be contacted by school staff, and no aid would be rendered due to the potential liability of a teacher calling 911 and the paramedics hurting you by mistake or doing something to cause a lawsuit. This school also posted all over the school a legal opinion written by the local school districts chief legal console that described how discriminate against gay/lesbian/transgendered students without crossing the line too much, so that you get away with it.

Talk about lawyers destroying society...

 

[Lifeguards For Life]

I once attended a special campus in high school run by the local school district, because I wanted to attend a CISCO computer networking class. The staff there was forbidden to do first aid, CPR, or even call 911 in a medical emergency. We had to sign a waiver that said if we had a medical emergency on campus, 911 would not be contacted by school staff, and no aid would be rendered due to the potential liability of a teacher calling 911 and the paramedics hurting you by mistake or doing something to cause a lawsuit. This school also posted all over the school a legal opinion written by the local school districts chief legal console that described how discriminate against gay/lesbian/transgendered students without crossing the line too much, so that you get away with it.

Talk about lawyers destroying society...

we had a kid get knocked unconscious with a baseball bat at a local high school and a teacher got reprimanded for calling 911. (another student had made the bat in shop, and it wasnt built so well. he swung it and the bulk of the bat flew off and hit this poor chick in the face )

 

[rescue99]

I once attended a special campus in high school run by the local school district, because I wanted to attend a CISCO computer networking class. The staff there was forbidden to do first aid, CPR, or even call 911 in a medical emergency. We had to sign a waiver that said if we had a medical emergency on campus, 911 would not be contacted by school staff, and no aid would be rendered due to the potential liability of a teacher calling 911 and the paramedics hurting you by mistake or doing something to cause a lawsuit. This school also posted all over the school a legal opinion written by the local school districts chief legal console that described how discriminate against gay/lesbian/transgendered students without crossing the line too much, so that you get away with it.

Talk about lawyers destroying society...

Seriously? This actually happened? :lol:

 

[Saytuck99]

Knowing first aid and actually working under a medical director as an EMT are two very different things. Do you know how many people got an EMT cert just for general knowledge or because an ARC course was not available in their area? If you are not working directly under a medical director you are no more than a lay person or in this case a teacher in a school system which is a much higher standard as you have been trusted by the school system and the parents to do things a first aider aka EMT can not.

However, if your Medical Director is covering you while at school and you are receiving some compensation or it is specifically written into your school's job description that includes the word EMT and lists the responsible doctor for you, you are NOT an EMT at school unless you were hired as one. The other teachers may look to you for guidiance in some situations but that is the extent your EMT training should be. All the Paramedics serving burgers an McDonalds while waiting for a job at the FD are not held to a higher standard if someone chokes on a fry. When I moonlight as a bartender with both a Paramedic cert and an RRT license, I am still basically a lay person if someone falls off a bar stool injuring themselves.

Now, has this discussed amongst your fellow teachers and addressed at the state level? It is of little use to discuss it on an anonymous forum with the majority of the members not being at all in your situation and who only know the "EMT" scope of practice. Your responsibility as a teacher is much different and times are changing since the good 'ole days as kids are living longer with diseases they should have died from. For the past 20 years they have been entering the school systems and I have been very happy with the way I have personally seen the teacheres in my area accept them. They have been more than receptive to their changing roles. I seriously believe you are letting the very limited training the EMT has provided you blind you from seeing your changing role as an educator and caregiver for these students in your care. Educators are changing even if EMS never does. It is also very sad that the textbooks for EMS have not changed to reflect the needs of a changing community and patient population.

I felt the need to jump in, there is some confusion that could be taken from what is said here. I speak only for my area, however, for the purposes of legal liability only take the above with a grain of salt. Be aware that the above mixes to separate legal issues. First, the duty to act and second the legal liability you incur from that action. In my state, as medic, emt, or lay person you are not required to act when you observe someone in a medical emergency when not on duty (volly or employment). You can watch them die and not incur any liability. However, if you choose to act you will self impose a duty to act reasonably under the circumstances. For the lay person, you are required to act as any other reasonable person would under the circumstances, (if the person is bleeding to death and you try and stop the bleeding that is reasonable even if you unintentionally cause more damage-but if you intervene and do something unreasonable such as wrap his head in saran wrap to stop the bleeding and suffocate him your in trouble.) If you are an EMT, medic or other professional and you choose to act out of goodwill then you are held to the higher standard of your individualized training. In other words you would be judged by what a reasonable EMT, Medic etc would have done in the same scenario. For example I am in the legal field, however, if I choose to aid my employer who is having a seizure and I administer a prescribed medication beyond my protocols and it kills him (even though the med is prescribed to him, its helped him before and he told me to) I am liable for his death. Not only will I be sued, but I will lose my EMT card as well.

In addition, and departing from the above, depending on the age of the child we are talking about, you need consent to treat in certain circumstances. Implied consent only extends to the treatment necessary to aid the patient within your training level.

Finally, not to beat an already buried horse, but if you happened upon a car accident, as an EMT-B and decided to help, would you assist a child with medication at the direction of the parent that you were not otherwise authorized to give at your training level-or would you call medical control for authorization.

I will not weigh in on what should or should not be done. It is STATE specific. But from a legal standpoint if it were me, I would find another way to deal with the situation or go through the appropriate channels to ensure that my butt was covered legally prior to administering any medication to any child.

sorry for the rant......

 

[VentMedic]

If you are an EMT, medic or other professional and you choose to act out of goodwill then you are held to the higher standard of your individualized training. In other words you would be judged by what a reasonable EMT, Medic etc would have done in the same scenario. For example I am in the legal field, however, if I choose to aid my employer who is having a seizure and I administer a prescribed medication beyond my protocols and it kills him (even though the med is prescribed to him, its helped him before and he told me to) I am liable for his death. Not only will I be sued, but I will lose my EMT card as well.

That is if you act in a manner other than what a lay person would do. Those who carry all their EMT equipment with them to play whacker 24/7 may inflict their own pain with the legal system. However, for an EMT to do CPR just as any lay person would do will not give cause the legal system to come after the person JUST because he is an EMT. If he attempted to pull out his whacker bag and try to do a cric off duty, then there might be a cause. But as we all know you can sue anyone for anything in the U.S. You should not discourage someone who holds a medical license or certification from providing first aid if appropriate for their own safety in fear of losing their license. This is also why some Good Samaritain laws have included off duty health care professionals who act in good faith.

In addition, and departing from the above, depending on the age of the child we are talking about, you need consent to treat in certain circumstances. Implied consent only extends to the treatment necessary to aid the patient within your training level.

The school systems have consent forms from the parents. The teachers are not running around at random giving out these meds to anyone who looks like they are having a seizure. This is nothing knew but it took years of lobbying to given students and teachers these opportunities. This is not about some advocacy fanatics as MMiz has suggested in a previous post but rather very involved professionals with the interests of the child in the school system. Those in EMS really should step out of their ambulance to see what the rest of medicine is involved in.

You might check out some of the wordings in various statutes as well as the cases that have brought about change.

I will not weigh in on what should or should not be done. It is STATE specific. But from a legal standpoint if it were me, I would find another way to deal with the situation or go through the appropriate channels to ensure that my butt was covered legally prior to administering any medication to any child.

This is why he should be addressing his concerns with the school system and not on an anonymous forum with mostly 110 hour trained EMTs on it. Many here do not understand how other medical professions have fought for the CHILD and his right to an education as well as swift medical care. These statutes written for the school systems have also taken into consideration that in many areas of this country, ONLY an EMT-B will be responding who can do very, very little for these emergencies except to drive real fast to the ED which could be many miles away. Even in FL where we have all ALS response, it has been noted that a response could be 4 minutes or 15 minutes even in the best of cities. We also have the death count in the school systems before implimenting these programs to show the need for school systems to be more proactive in the health of the children.

If a teacher takes the necessary training for CPR, AED, the medications they can deliver and some information about the diseases, their training can add up to some impressive hours which can out number that of the EMT. Couple that to the time spent in college, you may have a much more mature person responding to the needs of that child who they already know their history.

Finally, not to beat an already buried horse, but if you happened upon a car accident, as an EMT-B and decided to help, would you assist a child with medication at the direction of the parent that you were not otherwise authorized to give at your training level-or would you call medical control for authorization.

You have definitely made a great argument as to why the U.S. EMT-B is a very inadequate certification. Hopefully the future will eliminate these issues with an increase in education and training.

 

[Saytuck99]

Agreed

Vent:

I agree almost 100% with you. I feel for the children and with a little training and adjustment teachers would be in a position to aid special needs children in a classroom setting, whether it be meds, accommodations or other. Unfortunately from my experience in my field, and not experience as a newly certified EMT-B, the same parents that consent to the meds, accommodations and teachers participation in treatment will turn on a dime and take that teacher for everything he has, or does not have as well as take his ability to make a living both as a teacher and an EMT.

Companies, school districts, public officials etc. are not known for backing the little guy when push comes to shove. While one may be able to secure adequate coverage for such an incident from either the school or union, when that parent get on tv and blames the school for killing a child, that teachers job is history regardless of fault, union affiliation or otherwise. In addition, the powers that be will suspend all licenses pending investigation and if they can will pin the blame on that teacher to avoid there own liability. And its not the admin of the school doing it, it is the lawyers for the school that will do it and admin will follow suit.

Unfortunately good intentions, good will and good faith cannot protect someone from trying to do the right thing if an adverse outcome happens to be the result. Again, I agree with you whole heartedly in principle, both that as an EMT-B I have very little ability to actually help someone in need Yet I am held to a standard that defies common sense) and that something needs
to be done to address the growing population of children in schools who require additional attention. What that solution is? Who knows-maybe with a bigger budget every school can have an MD on site, but until then sometimes doing the right thing may wind up depriving your own family, wife, kids etc...its a sad wold we live in--

 

[VentMedic]

Vent:

I agree almost 100% with you. I feel for the children and with a little training and adjustment teachers would be in a position to aid special needs children in a classroom setting, whether it be meds, accommodations or other. Unfortunately from my experience in my field, and not experience as a newly certified EMT-B, the same parents that consent to the meds, accommodations and teachers participation in treatment will turn on a dime and take that teacher for everything he has, or does not have as well as take his ability to make a living both as a teacher and an EMT.

Companies, school districts, public officials etc. are not known for backing the little guy when push comes to shove. While one may be able to secure adequate coverage for such an incident from either the school or union, when that parent get on tv and blames the school for killing a child, that teachers job is history regardless of fault, union affiliation or otherwise. In addition, the powers that be will suspend all licenses pending investigation and if they can will pin the blame on that teacher to avoid there own liability. And its not the admin of the school doing it, it is the lawyers for the school that will do it and admin will follow suit.

Unfortunately good intentions, good will and good faith cannot protect someone from trying to do the right thing if an adverse outcome happens to be the result. Again, I agree with you whole heartedly in principle, both that as an EMT-B I have very little ability to actually help someone in need Yet I am held to a standard that defies common sense) and that something needs
to be done to address the growing population of children in schools who require additional attention. What that solution is? Who knows-maybe with a bigger budget every school can have an MD on site, but until then sometimes doing the right thing may wind up depriving your own family, wife, kids etc...its a sad wold we live in--

This is not just one child. We are talking about many children that are entering the school systems taking some type of medication. Many times the child is allowed to administer their own medication. But, even at that, do you know how many years it took and how many children had to die before an albuterol inhaler could be carried by the child instead of being locked up in a school nurse's office who was often at another campus?

We've already gone from having a school nurse available and even RRTs on some campuses. And yes, MDs have been involved. Right now the MDs are very involved with petitioning the legislators to empower the school systems. Some states are so broke they can not afford schools and now have massive layoffs of teachers and are closing schools. Healthcare for children has also taken a big hit.

EMS has so many problems of its own it has little time to concern itself about its own education with some of the medical issues of children or what is happening in their own community. Maybe if they raised their own knowledge level, they would see why some of these issues are of importance. And yes, there is concern in the school systems among the school nurses who must delegate in certain situations and among the teachers who feel their inservices were not adequate. However, those who did receive adequate education and training are very supportive of the healthcare needs of the children to allow them access to education. Thus, if MMiz feels his inservices for these medications are not adequate, that should be what is addressed and bringing his EMT cert into the issue. If anything that should be used as an example of what can happen when inadequate training is provided as now seen in the U.S. EMS levels.

 

[Aidey]

I personally would consult a lawyer, just to have everything clarified and see how your state/county etc look at it and make sure that they don't see any issues.

If I were an educator I would be very hesitant to also step into a caregiver role for medical issues. It is such a huge issue for legal problems and liability that I would be very concerned. The more I think about it the more I go "ehhh" and cringe to myself.

Teachers are having larger and larger class sizes these days, and you have to think about all of the students. If you have 30 students in a class room how can one person take care of a seizing kid, while keeping track of the other 29 and keeping them calm and out of the way?

In a case like this, how is Matt supposed to handle administering the medication? Does he usher all his other kids into the hall and leave them there unsupervised so he can give the Diastat in an empty room? Does he move the seizing child to somewhere private? Does tell everyone not to move and administer it while trying to preserve the kids privacy as best as he can?

What happens if the child has a seizure on the play ground, or the cafeteria, where there are even more bystanders. Will the school have privacy screens they can move around the child, or is the school going to be equipped to safely move a child having tonic-clonic activity to a private place? Are they going to have the resources to keep all the other children away?

What happens if a teacher waits to give the diastat in order to get all the other kids out of the room so they can administer it in private and the child suffers a brain injury or dies?

Now that I've probably thoroughly freaked you out Matt, you can see why I say consult a lawyer. There are just so may variables that I don't see how the liability isn't too great.

I can understand teachers being allowed to give* a student their own medication when they ask for it, like an inhaler, or assist with a medication the student states they need, like an inhaler or epi pen. What starts to bother me is allowing teachers to decide when the student needs it. (*By give, I mean hand over if it's in the teachers possession)

I also understand that more students are in schools today with complicated medical devices. Again, I think it's one thing to have a class explaining to all the teachers what the device is and what it does and how it works, and it's another to expect the teachers to program/run/troubleshoot it.

One of the big things I think that prevents blanket statements from being made is that each child's case has to be looked at differently to determine how big of a role teachers can be expected to play in their medical care.

Honestly, teachers are already expected to play so many different roles to kids, I don't think adding medical caregiver should be another one. I don't think it's fair to the teachers, or the students. If a school has children enrolled that may need medications administered or have special medical devices the school should be required to have a medical professional on site.

And yes, I understand that many of these kids do not have medical caregivers at home and their parents handle all of their needs. These parents have probably spent years working with their kids and their medications/equipment and have talked to the doctors and attended classes and have been educated by their child's health care team. And they don't have to worry about watching 30 other kids at the same time. The teachers do not have anywhere near the same chance to learn as much and I think expecting them to care for their students medical needs is too much.

 

[Aidey]

I want to add that I know funding is an issue, but unless they change the equal access to education laws (which I doubt is going to happen) people are going to have to accept that having heath care professionals available to assist these students is necessary. I think this is a really good example of where the reality has far exceeded what people expected could be achieved and no one planed for it.

Also, I'm not saying that teachers shouldn't be involved at all. I absolutely think we should be educating teachers so they know what is going on with their students. My issue is the increasingly advanced level of medical care they are being expected to provide.

 

[VentMedic]

I personally would consult a lawyer, just to have everything clarified and see how your state/county etc look at it and make sure that they don't see any issues.

If I were an educator I would be very hesitant to also step into a caregiver role for medical issues. It is such a huge issue for legal problems and liability that I would be very concerned. The more I think about it the more I go "ehhh" and cringe to myself.

Teachers are having larger and larger class sizes these days, and you have to think about all of the students. If you have 30 students in a class room how can one person take care of a seizing kid, while keeping track of the other 29 and keeping them calm and out of the way?

In a case like this, how is Matt supposed to handle administering the medication? Does he usher all his other kids into the hall and leave them there unsupervised so he can give the Diastat in an empty room? Does he move the seizing child to somewhere private? Does tell everyone not to move and administer it while trying to preserve the kids privacy as best as he can?

What happens if the child has a seizure on the play ground, or the cafeteria, where there are even more bystanders. Will the school have privacy screens they can move around the child, or is the school going to be equipped to safely move a child having tonic-clonic activity to a private place? Are they going to have the resources to keep all the other children away?

What happens if a teacher waits to give the diastat in order to get all the other kids out of the room so they can administer it in private and the child suffers a brain injury or dies?

Now that I've probably thoroughly freaked you out Matt, you can see why I say consult a lawyer. There are just so may variables that I don't see how the liability isn't too great.

I can understand teachers being allowed to give* a student their own medication when they ask for it, like an inhaler, or assist with a medication the student states they need, like an inhaler or epi pen. What starts to bother me is allowing teachers to decide when the student needs it. (*By give, I mean hand over if it's in the teachers possession)

I also understand that more students are in schools today with complicated medical devices. Again, I think it's one thing to have a class explaining to all the teachers what the device is and what it does and how it works, and it's another to expect the teachers to program/run/troubleshoot it.

One of the big things I think that prevents blanket statements from being made is that each child's case has to be looked at differently to determine how big of a role teachers can be expected to play in their medical care.

Honestly, teachers are already expected to play so many different roles to kids, I don't think adding medical caregiver should be another one. I don't think it's fair to the teachers, or the students. If a school has children enrolled that may need medications administered or have special medical devices the school should be required to have a medical professional on site.

And yes, I understand that many of these kids do not have medical caregivers at home and their parents handle all of their needs. These parents have probably spent years working with their kids and their medications/equipment and have talked to the doctors and attended classes and have been educated by their child's health care team. And they don't have to worry about watching 30 other kids at the same time. The teachers do not have anywhere near the same chance to learn as much and I think expecting them to care for their students medical needs is too much.

It all comes down to training and proper education. This is again NOT a new issue. In some areas it is a necessity since only BLS with EMTs is the only EMS available.

But, if you want to talk about liability, what about EMTs taking responsibility for a child when they have NO ability to administer that medication or any medication? There is very little education in the EMT curriculum that even prepares them for the basic medical emergencies of a child or adult. Hospitals and LTC facilities must trust their patients to the care of an EMT for transport knowing that they have very little knowledge about medical issues since their training is largely about first aid. EMTs accept patients with very complex medical conditions when they transport dialysis patients or most medical needs patient. Again, their first aid training gives them very little knowledge on how to care for that patient other than a ride to the ED. Some even believe "dialysis" is a diagnosis rather than a medical procedure. Yet, EMTs do these transports every day. The trust that hospitals and LTC facilities must place with EMTs is not that much different than what parents must place in the teachers of their school system. The difference should be in the education and training which should be made available to the teachers. At least teachers are questioning their limitations and do know there is a need for more education/training before these medications can be given safely.

Assuming responsibility and knowing that anyone can be sued is part of being a professional be it in medicine or education. Educators can be sued for just about anything and it doesn't have to be about giving a medication. You accept your responsibility and make sure you have been provided with adequate training to do your job. One shouldn't let their fear of lawsuits paralyze them.

EMS plods along every day with inadequate education (U.S.) in many areas but still some rush out to do it even if they don't know anything other than a few protocols. A teacher can read a protocol just as easily as an EMT.

 

[Aidey]

If an area does not have ALS that is an issue for that area as a whole, and what they are willing to pay for via taxes. An individual teacher should not be expected to make up for a whole county or city's decision not to support a tax levy to fund full time ALS(Or whatever other scenario applies). You can't blame the teachers or the staff members of LTC facilities for the 911 system in their area, nor can you expect them to make up for any deficiencies it has.

All I have to say about the transfer issue is this. On non-911 transfers the sending medical provider has the ability to state whether the pt is an BLS or ALS patient. If they pick BLS that is their choice. If they don't understand the difference that is a problem with their education, not the EMTs and Paramedics.

If they don't have the option of ALS transfers, then see point 1 above.

Every profession comes with its own areas of liability. The issue I see here is taking one profession and exposing them to the liability of another profession they didn't sign up for. They are teachers because they want to teach, not because they want to provide medical care. It's like becoming a Paramedic and then being told I'm going to be responsible for maintaining all the electrical on the ambulance and here is a 2 hour class to explain how. I'm not an electrician or mechanic, that is another profession all together, and suddenly I'm being given all their liability without any of their resources.

 

[VentMedic]

It's like becoming a Paramedic and then being told I'm going to be responsible for maintaining all the electrical on the ambulance and here is a 2 hour class to explain how.

As ridiculous as you wanted your example to sound, it actually is not. A Paramedic should know some basics about their electrical system on the ambulance for safety of other medical equipment (plugging in a CCT/Flight team vents, isolettes, med pumps etc) and malfunctions with the emergency lighting. However, they are not responsible for the detailed maintenance that requires a professional electrician/mechanic anymore than the teacher is required to do more than what is asked by his/her guidelines and instructions from the child's parents and MD. The teacher is not prescribing the medications.

Teachers entering the profession now are aware of the medical needs students in their classroom and that they may have to take responsibility as a caregiver as well. This again is NOT a new issue. We are not rewriting any legislation here. MMiz just needs to clarify the education/training concerns he has with what he has been provided. He should also address this from his role as a teacher and not that of an EMT.

Maybe some should just see what is happening in their own communiity and school systems.

EMS providers just don't seem to have any interest in getting involved in anything that concerns community issues or even what happens in their own profession. Some are not even willing to take CEUs or inservices about these issues that concern the health of children.

Many healthcare professionals and their associations (RNs, MDs, NPs, RRTs, PAs, etc), each with their attorneys, have been involved in seeing that school professionals and children have access to medications. This is not just an "EMS decision" especially when some in EMS do not even know what the issues are.

Get involved in what is going on around you in your community and in medicine. EMS is part of medicine and part of the community. You shouldn't be so jaded to believe there are not more health care issues than what was mentioned in your EMT(P) text book.

 

[daedalus]

It's like becoming a Paramedic and then being told I'm going to be responsible for maintaining all the electrical on the ambulance and here is a 2 hour class to explain how.

I actually think this makes a good case for educators to be able to provide simple medical care to their students. I personally have researched some of the non medical equipment in my ambulance so that I am truly knowledgeable in my job as an EMT, and soon Paramedic. If you are working in a class room with a group of high risk children, while your primary job is education, you should have some training in the medical issues of these children because not only does this affect the type of teaching you are going to do, but you as a teacher are in a great position to see changes in student conditions because you are with them for most of the day during the week. You are in a great position to intervene in acute episodes in these children and save lives.

On the other hand, aidey made a great point about privacy. Since diastat is per rectum, what about patient privacy when administering, and what about the rights of others to not have to watch such a procedure.

 

[VentMedic]

On the other hand, aidey made a great point about privacy. Since diastat is per rectum, what about patient privacy when administering, and what about the rights of others to not have to watch such a procedure.

I've also known EMS providers to strip a child naked before teachers could remove the other kids. Can't always control every situation as well as one would like but one can try.

 

[redcrossemt]

Unfortunately my state, like many, does not provide immunity for the administration of medications in times of emergency. Neither my EMT insurance or my professional liability insurance (for teaching) will cover the ministration of medication.

Actually, as a teacher in Michigan, you are exempt from both civil and criminal liability for administration of medication to a student in an emergency situation as long as:

1. The medication is prescribed to the student and has directions for use by the physician.
2. There is an authorization note from the parents.
3. You give the medication in the presence of another adult.

This is all from MCL 380.1178 if you want to look it up.

if it is a known re occuring condition, as i am guessing it is if your student has been prescribed diastat

I don't get this! Diazepam does save lives, and prevent permanent disability. Hypoxia is a big concern in kids. Diastat is usually prescribed to those most at risk for status epilepticus and hypoxia. Just because someone has a diagnosed seizure disorder doesn't make the risk of status any less...

 

[Aidey]

I think the comparison works considering I don't think teachers shouldn't be involved at all. As a paramedic I should know how my ambulance works, but I shouldn't be expected to be able to re-wire the siren if it fails. Teachers should know about their students conditions and devices but I don't think they should be expected to give them medical treatment.

Like I said before, handing an inhaler to a student so they can self administer or moving furniture away from a child having a seizure is one thing. Providing medical treatment is another.

 

[redcrossemt]

I think the comparison works considering I don't think teachers shouldn't be involved at all. As a paramedic I should know how my ambulance works, but I shouldn't be expected to be able to re-wire the siren if it fails. Teachers should know about their students conditions and devices but I don't think they should be expected to give them medical treatment.

Like I said before, handing an inhaler to a student so they can self administer or moving furniture away from a child having a seizure is one thing. Providing medical treatment is another.

So.... the teachers should let their students die from asthma attacks, anaphylaxis, and seizures while waiting for the ambulance? Even when legally protected by the state, with a prescription from a physician and authorization from the parents?

Or should these students just not be allowed to go to school?

 

[VentMedic]

I think the comparison works considering I don't think teachers shouldn't be involved at all. As a paramedic I should know how my ambulance works, but I shouldn't be expected to be able to re-wire the siren if it fails. Teachers should know about their students conditions and devices but I don't think they should be expected to give them medical treatment.

Like I said before, handing an inhaler to a student so they can self administer or moving furniture away from a child having a seizure is one thing. Providing medical treatment is another.

That puts the school systems back to the 1960s which much of EMS is still stuck.

It is sad that the Paramedic education does not include more about the medical needs children or more about pediatrics to see how broad this issue is and that is it often the teachers that do know their students. The Paramedic might then understand where time is the issue and not their own delicate issues of insecurity that a teacher can do what they can. That essentially is what this is about. Other medical professions have given their support to the teachers in legislative issues and with preparing them for medical needs children.

It is also sad that you don't see that if you take the meds out of the schools that it will also include the inhalers out of the hands of children and where does it stop? Definitely take away the AED and the emergency O2! The kids will no longer able to attend schools again or at least be denied the same opportunities as others. This has been a lengthy process starting in the 1970s and really getting noticed in the 1980s. It was not a spur of the moment decision and has been hashed out in the court systems across the country. Again, a sad note that some do not pay attention to the many medical issues around them and that goes for the EMTs who may even have school age children. Times are changing and the attitudes of EMS providers need to change and to enhance their own education to change with medicine and education as they evolve.