How many on a call

[noelchabanel]

Would a town without any EMS system whatsoever receive assistance from county or state government?

No, the closest service would most likely be the one to send an ambulance. They would bill the patient, or possibly the town they responded to for mutual aid. The state and county get their money from the same source as the town: me :rolleyes:. A 24 hour fully staffed paid service costs the same no matter who signs the checks. We can't afford it either way.

And no, paycheck doesn't dictate passion, but ability to devote one's career to it can allow you to immerse yourself in it. I never claimed full-time EMS by nature was better or had more devotion, rather it allowed it.

It also allows the possibility that some people can stay in a job they are no good at because they can't easily be fired, will make a good retirement, and in towns with less than 5000 people (which is MOST of my state) they may only have to work hard once a week when one person happens to be sick.

I can match your examples with examples of poor EMS volunteers as far as professionalism and reliability and motivation for doing the job (being a health professional versus having a fun lights/sirens job), but that doesn't mean all/most volunteers are like that and no one claimed so.

There are plenty of losers in all career fields, including paid EMT's. There are cops who are in it becase they like telling people what to do. There are teachers who like having the summer off. One could argue it's harder to get rid of paid unionized employees with bad motivation in those fields. What is your point?

The people who gave you the thumbs down are people who could very likely get paid full time jobs in EMS. The fact that we argue against it for our communities should tell you something. :rolleyes:

[AnthonyM83]

There are plenty of losers in all career fields, including paid EMT's. There are cops who are in it becase they like telling people what to do. There are teachers who like having the summer off. One could argue it's harder to get rid of paid unionized employees with bad motivation in those fields. What is your point?

My point was just that: there are losers in every field, paid/unpaid. It was in reply to your post where you pointed out burnouts in paid EMS.

I gave examples of losers in unpaid EMS to match and show there's no point in pointing out the bad apples since every field has them. They're not indicative of the entire profession (that's why I was surprised you brought the examples up, originally).

The people who gave you the thumbs down are people who could very likely get paid full time jobs in EMS. The fact that we argue against it for our communities should tell you something. :rolleyes:

Be sure of this. I'm not slamming anyone here on their abilities. My argument is based on the idea that a full-time professional would have more time to devote to their passion, in terms of training, education, medical updates, quality improvement, etc.

As far as whether it's possible, I'm not sure, which is why I asked the follow-up questions about what would happen if the volunteer system disappeared...to explore the topic.

[noelchabanel]

My point was just that: there are losers in every field, paid/unpaid. It was in reply to your post where you pointed out burnouts in paid EMS.

I gave examples of losers in unpaid EMS to match and show there's no point in pointing out the bad apples since every field has them. They're not indicative of the entire profession (that's why I was surprised you brought the examples up, originally).

That was someone elses point I think, I guess we agree on that. The exception doesn't prove the rule.

Be sure of this. I'm not slamming anyone here on their abilities. My argument is based on the idea that a full-time professional would have more time to devote to their passion, in terms of training, education, medical updates, quality improvement, etc.

As far as whether it's possible, I'm not sure, which is why I asked the follow-up questions about what would happen if the volunteer system disappeared...to explore the topic.

Outside of urban areas, where there are more funds to support that type of service, it would mean longer rides to the hospital and a longer wait before someone shows up on scene. We had a serious call last night and almost the entire squad showed up within 5 minutes. Before I got the ambulance there (and I happened to be AT the station when we were paged!) some of our guys were already doing CPR. Urban areas don't really exist in my state in a real sense. The entire state is has a smaller population than some suburbs in California. We do have 100% full time departments in the larger communities here (the largerst city has only 120,000 people), but certainly not in towns with 2000 or 200 people. It might enable more training time, but on the other hand, I know from my perspective, I am unpaid and at a minimum go to 2 or 3 hours of training every week, read EMS journals in my spare time, and work with the practical licensing exams one weekend a month. Since full timers would answer more calls for a larger area it might not work out the way you'd think for training hours. With paperwork, answering 3 calls could easily take up an 8 hour shift realistically. It could go either way.

[Lena]

Arizona State has some interesting EMS response ICS plans they are coming up with. They are similar to the ICS fire departments have in place for fire emergencies now, but incorporates the emergency medical system into it. First responders and private agencies responding to medical calls would benefit from already having a plan in place- especially if there's an MCI of any kind. It pays to plan ahead and be prepared even if you don't think anything will ever happen. Why wait until lives are sacrificed? Forward thinking can be very beneficial. Now to pitch that to your public ;)

Check out the NIOSH site- they have some interesting information on it.