Shishkabob
Forum Chief
- 8,264
- 32
- 48
That last sentence came off ratter condrotational. I appologize.
Getting EMT-B cert for Firefighting?
- Thread starter FuManChu
- Start date
Who said FFs don't like EMS? That's an assumption on your part!? Guess what, Cops don't like doing traffic control or taking BS reports... Should we create another agency that sits around waiting for those calls?
Again it comes down to efficiency. Makes no sense to have FFs sitting around all day waiting for a fire call when 8 out of 10 are EMS related. If u were
the mayor of a city in charge of budget considerations, I'm sure you'd feel differently?
Again it comes down to efficiency. Makes no sense to have FFs sitting around all day waiting for a fire call when 8 out of 10 are EMS related. If u were
the mayor of a city in charge of budget considerations, I'm sure you'd feel differently?
LucidResq
Forum Deputy Chief
- 2,031
- 3
- 0
Exactly why we should cut back on funding for Fire and devote more resources and funding for a third service EMS.
EMS was at one point the red-headed stepchild of public safety. Then, as the need for a fire department has decreased, fire departments were happy to snatch EMS up as a reason to keep them around. Fire-based EMS shouldn't exist just an excuse to keep people employed as firefighters and for cities to dump more money in to purchasing fire engines and stations.
Some real world examples to back these opinions...
In 1997 the San Francisco Fire Department, which had been providing BLS only, merged with the ALS ambulance service operated by the local Public Health dept. By 2003, there were enough problems to warrant an examination by a Civil Grand Jury. They came to the conclusion....
In 2005 the city health department released a report examining "critical deficiencies" in the EMS operations of San Francisco. Auditors found that treatment protocol errors/emissions were found in 70% of cases, clinical performance standards were met just 44% of the time for patients transported to the ED and only 10% of charts were completed properly.
No such major problems prior to the merger.
LucidResq
Forum Deputy Chief
- 2,031
- 3
- 0
OH- Here's another great example of the fire service's commitment to providing quality EMS.
And what does the Louisana fire service have to say about this?
And what does the Louisana fire service have to say about this?
jwilliams161
Forum Ride Along
- 9
- 0
- 0
Well the emt-b program I'm starting this summer is 10 weeks at a community college
As far as your examples are concerned... examples are like opinions, everyone has them. I can show you just as many examples of Fire based EMS systems that have had great success. The bottom line is (even with better fire codes) we will always need FFs in our communities. As I said before, why have them sitting around doing nothing waiting for a fire/rescue call when they are as capable as anyone else of providing EMS. Is the dual education requirement too much for ya? Is 3-4 months of EMT school and the fire academy just too much info for the old hard drive to store? Again, there are examples of failures in systems of both types in certain situations... that's inevitable. My point is that it is far more efficient, inexpensive and less beaurocratic to have them combined. Ever watched an emergency unfold in NYC? Love those guys/gals to death, but what a cluster____! At an emergency in the water, you'll have FDNY, FDNY EMS, NYPD ESU (which is a rescue as well as L.E. unit) NY Port Authority & on and on... I'm assuming you all have taken NIMS courses. Think about the Incident Command principals and what is more efficient? As for the Louisiana thing, I'm not sure what that even means? Any legitimate EMS organization works under the direction of a Medical Program Director.
Shishkabob
Forum Chief
- 8,264
- 32
- 48
*Sigh* Sure, there are FFs who like EMS. Hell, I never put a quantitative figure on my statement.
But if you are going to try and tell me that some/many/most/all FFs didn't become EMTs/Medics JUST for the job, and that they have little to no interest in medicine, you sir are VERY mistaken.
You're a self proclaimed expert on the matter. Go to your local stations and ask how many of them WANTED to do EMS, and how many of them just got the certs because they had to for the job.
Not an assumption. I know fire/medics who hate doing EMS, and I know ones that love them. But for you to tell me what I do and do not know is laughable.
Last I checked we didn't require LEOs to hold certification in directing traffic.
Agreed!
Again, if most calls don't require fire-based skills, WHY pay for fire? You're talking about economical efficiency but you're arguing against your self.
If a specialized department is hardly used, why not withdraw funding from that and put it where it WILL be used, instead of making the department bigger and require MORE funding to be less specialized?
And just for further emphasis:
Last I checked we didn't require LEOs to hold certification in directing traffic.
It is an assumption on your part. Have you ever taken a statistics class? Are you aware of statistical inference, sample size, empirical evidence based conclusions? “Your” particular experiences as far as what you’ve heard and spoken to about what people like or don’t like doesn’t mean much as far as the bigger picture. So, again it is an assumption on your part!
As far as Fire is concerned, I’m not sure why you are so confused? It’s rarely used, but a critical resource when there is a fire! We are always going to have fires and therefore need FFs. When there is a large fire, you need ample resources to deal with it. Look at the military… when we are not at war, do we just close up shop and get rid of people? Of course not, they need to be on stand by for when they are needed. My point to that end is, since we need to have FFs available to respond why not use them in a dual role as EMS providers?
I work at an F.D. The guys/gals I work with embrace the job and all that comes with it. My Dept provides an in house EMT-I course for airway, IV and 12 lead. People are chomping at the bit to take the class! As far as your question about how many FFs took EMT cause they had to, is invalid and irrational. Out here, its part of the job, end of story. That question is like asking a Dr. what their intent was in going to Med School or a soldier’s intent for going to basic training.
As far as Fire is concerned, I’m not sure why you are so confused? It’s rarely used, but a critical resource when there is a fire! We are always going to have fires and therefore need FFs. When there is a large fire, you need ample resources to deal with it. Look at the military… when we are not at war, do we just close up shop and get rid of people? Of course not, they need to be on stand by for when they are needed. My point to that end is, since we need to have FFs available to respond why not use them in a dual role as EMS providers?
I work at an F.D. The guys/gals I work with embrace the job and all that comes with it. My Dept provides an in house EMT-I course for airway, IV and 12 lead. People are chomping at the bit to take the class! As far as your question about how many FFs took EMT cause they had to, is invalid and irrational. Out here, its part of the job, end of story. That question is like asking a Dr. what their intent was in going to Med School or a soldier’s intent for going to basic training.
Shishkabob
Forum Chief
- 8,264
- 32
- 48
I'd be lying if I said I was surprised.
You're arguing with your own ideals and you don't even see it.
Last edited by a moderator:
dudemanguy
Forum Lieutenant
- 112
- 0
- 16
Dave makes a good argument about fire based EMS being more cost effective.
Is there any evidence that fire based EMS has a significant effect on patient care? Lower survival rates or worse patient outcomes? More lawsuits and charges of negligence? Do hospital emergency departments see a difference between the two?
Is there any evidence that fire based EMS has a significant effect on patient care? Lower survival rates or worse patient outcomes? More lawsuits and charges of negligence? Do hospital emergency departments see a difference between the two?
TransportJockey
Forum Chief
- 8,623
- 1,675
- 113
I know the hospital system I used to work in (3 hospitals) would tend to groan when FD based would be bringing someone in. We hated dealing with the FDs. We had trouble with things being done and their entire attitude sucked.
How am I Possibly arguing against my ideals? For a
remedial follow follow up for our slower learners, here goes!? I believe in Fire based EMS. I work for an EMS based FD where we do both. I agree with this system because of the fact that we need FFs on duty in the event of fires or rescues, ie: vehicle extrication. That being said, I think it's utterly
silly and a waste of resources for FFs to sit around all day waiting for fires and that is why I agree with these same individuals also providing primary EMS. It is a more simple command system and is ultately less expensive because
of less logistic, beauracratic and duplication of resource issues.
remedial follow follow up for our slower learners, here goes!? I believe in Fire based EMS. I work for an EMS based FD where we do both. I agree with this system because of the fact that we need FFs on duty in the event of fires or rescues, ie: vehicle extrication. That being said, I think it's utterly
silly and a waste of resources for FFs to sit around all day waiting for fires and that is why I agree with these same individuals also providing primary EMS. It is a more simple command system and is ultately less expensive because
of less logistic, beauracratic and duplication of resource issues.
I would say in the perfect world firefighters would handle fire issues, police officers would handle police issues and EMS personell would handle EMS issues.
We dont live in a perfect world and in this economy I dont see any drastic changes being made to how EMS is delivered. As long as its being delivered competently thats all we can hope for.
I know EMS/firefighters and EMS only providers some suck and some are fantastic it isnt dependent on what uniform their wearing.
We dont live in a perfect world and in this economy I dont see any drastic changes being made to how EMS is delivered. As long as its being delivered competently thats all we can hope for.
I know EMS/firefighters and EMS only providers some suck and some are fantastic it isnt dependent on what uniform their wearing.
Last edited by a moderator:
AnthonyTheEmt
Forum Lieutenant
- 169
- 8
- 18
Hey man, how bout you lay off and stop being such a ****. Who are you to judge?
dudemanguy
Forum Lieutenant
- 112
- 0
- 16
I think that sums it up.
I'm an EMT who has zero interest in or knowledge of firefighting. In my area EMS is handled by a private ambulance company. There is a volunteer FD in one of the small towns that has a BLS rig. I'm not sure how useful it is, but the firefighters do seem to be thrilled when they get a call and get there before ALS and get to do something lol
medichopeful
Flight RN/Paramedic
- 1,863
- 255
- 83
h34r:
Melclin
Forum Deputy Chief
- 1,796
- 4
- 0
Yup. Unfortunately, that is something that would seem normal over your way. Asking about being a fireman on an Ambulance forum makes about much sense as asking about law enforcement on a fireman forum. Not having a go at you OP. It's not at all your fault that you walked into this argument. Just understand that American EMS has many problems and the issue of poor education and its association with FD is at the centre of it. Brown and I come from countries where paramedics are educated to a level commensurate with the kind of medical care they are providing. I'm talking uni graduate school, not six months of 'community college'. So you can see why it pisses us off that people spend 15 seconds in the back room of an FD and think they are "in emergency medicine".
Someone who comes from a country where paramedics are medical professionals on par with ICU/crit care nurses, not first aiders.
Would it piss you off if you had spent 8 years becoming a medical professional and some idiot chimes in with, "Yeah go to bone head college and get your cert, IV's are easy. I can tubed a mellon once and I barely passed the NREMT's test for kids who can't read good, so I assume I'm good at medicine and junk"?
Exaggerate much? I guess now it should take 8 years of education to work on an ambulance? I wonder how many of our forum members got their first ambulance job after 8 years of medical education....im gonna take an educated guess and put the number at ZERO.
With the number of people in this country spread out over such vast distances, and the number of 911 calls responded to every year, good luck making sure everyone who drives an ambulance meets that educational criteria, or even half that. How much is an ambulance ride gonna cost with that?
I'm happy for Australians if you have such a magnificant EMS system in your country, which has a population thats what, like 8% of Americas? Really, what works in Australia isnt necessarily going to be workable here.
Have you ever even BEEN to America, much less worked in EMS here, done any EMS training here, or taken an NREMT exam?
I see so much hyperbole and exaggeration in some of the comments here, its time to put on the waders.
TransportJockey
Forum Chief
- 8,623
- 1,675
- 113
Actually, Australia is pretty damned big and their population in some area is just as spread out or more than anywhere in the US. And why should they have to work the inferior system. Their entry level is what we should be striving for. Not a 120 hour 'advanced first aid' level like is staffed in a lot of places
No, it should not take eight years that's a bit silly. You can be a Doctor (MD) here in six.
But it shouldn't only take ten weeks down at the local patch factory or six months at a College. That is not adequate time to learn the art of advanced prehospital medicine.
With all due respect, your first two points are not relevant. Look to very rural Victoria in Australia and the rural parts of Canada to see how they get around the problem of isolation.
The number of calls is not relevant either, you should have sufficent resources to respond to them. Lowering education standard is not an excusable way of increasing numbers of Ambulance Officers.
About 10% I'd say; and again with due respect, that is not relevant. All your states require four years of medical school for doctors, at least two years for nurses, a Bachelors for all other allied health professions right? The NFPA standards are national standards for the Fire Service are they not?
Yes, yes, yes and yes.
I am not an ALS level Officer, and yet I can score in excess of 90% on every NREMT style Paramedic (ALS) exam I take; what does that tell you?
This is going to turn into a pissing match again, so I'm gonna sit down and be quiet.
Last edited by a moderator: