antiquefirelt

But they called 911 and got an EMS response. I'm not angry, and I truly hope there is more to this story. But to basically call this family liars, and further question their motives by commenting on their language skills and the use of the words "failure to follow protocols" is ridiculous. I'm sorry I don't see the burden of proof here being laid at the families feet. I see the DC Fire/EMS system needing to prove that they did follow protocols and a standard of care. And as a supervisor in a career Fire based EMS service, I am intimately familiar with BS complaints, real complaints, burned out providers, half truths and everything in between. Sadly more often than not, the patients are rarely totally making stuff up, though they may exaggerate.

No shame here. As I said, if the call went as originally described, then they were in the wrong. If, as many contend may have happened (we can only hope), they did try to convince this pt. to go, then all is not lost. As has been noted a few times, this incident will be decided by the quality of documentation. But so many make it sound like this is incredulous. It's not, it very well could be very poor care. I certainly don't hope this is the case, but let's keep our heads above the sand.

Some of you either work and live in the perfect system or you're full of sh*t if you think there aren't bad medics/EMT's out there. Hell yes this could have happened just as described, it happens more often than is reported. I've known medics that were all too happy to blow off chest pain as non-cardiac. Dinner time, Super Bowls, just burned out, etc. In the emergency medical profession it's one of the most common misdiagnoses, also the one with the worst consequences. Sorry to those EMS only folks, but it seems like the EMS only crews have a much higher burnout rate and a far shorter career ladder, leading to unhappy employees who may cut corners, lose their compassion or otherwise not really do the right thing when it's inconvenient. Hopefully there is more to the story and maybe this wasn't as reported, but all medics know the right way, but some choose the easy way. No different than firefighters, cops or any vocation. ckroll: "The EMT did not kill the patient, the heart attack did." Seriously, consider another career if you think this argument is at all valid. If these guys failed to do a proper assessment and blew off the chest pain as non-cardiac, it can be liken to giving the gun to a suicidal teen. If it was as reported, then they had a duty to act and failed in a negligent manner.

I was under the impression that this was all a smoke screen and cannot functionally happen. As it was explained to me, the hours FDNY works is somehow set by the State Legislature? And changing the overnight tours in companies changes working hours. It was said this was a ploy by Bloomberg who knew it wouldn't take place, but looks good to his supporters who want to see cuts made.

I imagine the five points are for the attendants riding sideways to the path of travel? They seem slightly restrictive of the provider. So where is the line draw between provider safety and patient care? If the 5 point harness was on a retraction system allowing some range of movement, it might be more functional. In all the only real innovation I see is that the box is set up mirror image of what our Type I's are. Our action areas and benches look very similar so I'm not seeing the advantage? Of course I don't ride the short bus anymore either.

I agree the report has she no new light for those of us who have any basic knowledge in this field. But, I'm not sure I agree that they're the preferred method. Most accounts show that while biological attack has a significant "fear factor" in the general populace, the ability to weaponize biological bacteria and viruses is much more difficult. We probably should fear MRSA more than a true biological attack. As ALS notes, explosives are still likely preferable as their easy to make, store, ship and detonate in comparison. Remember that for a terrorist to be successful they need only play on our fears, large loss of life is not always the only way. This is one reason there is still concern about attacks in America's Heartland. If we start to feel we're not safe anywhere, then they will have the upper hand. I know right now, through tons of meeting and conferences, "rural" America (atleast up here) thinks terrorism is a NYC, LA, Chicago problem. No one wants to see it happen, but they have little concern it will take place at a local level far from Metropolis.

Not only does it require chevrons, but the size and colors are also regulated. The stripes must be 6" and the colors alternating red/yellow, red/green or red/yellow-green. Our FD has been putting red/white chevrons on for the past three years with 4 vehicles/apparatus purchases. We just went to view the progress of our new Rescue Pumper and saw two pumpers with red/yellow-green chevrons. We immediately switched to this combination as it was far more visible(eye catching) than red white in daylight. We confirmed this as we noted how many other signs, vehicles, house and buildings were red and white, but nowhere was there any red/yellow-green. I think Bnechis is onto something though., The biggest complaint about the full chevron backed apparatus is there is too much retro reflectivity! The chevron lines/shape would show up far better at night if only one color was reflective. I'm seriously thinking that might be changed on our new RP as we have a few weeks before final graphics.

That was what I was thinking. He looks more upset overall than angry specifically with guy he was shoving.

Truck 4: How many firefighters staff the big 18 unit station at a time? I guess our idea of regionalization and their's is skewed. To me more smaller stations would seem better to end user service delivery, though far more costly I suppose.

I agree there is much more to properly sizing up the job, but the TIC is a great asset if you need to make entry above the fire. Sounding the floor puts you within inches of the potential collapse vs. the TIC which gives you a good view of the heat on the floor. You need to evaluate what you're seeing and that can pose difficult as who knows how "white" something needs to be before it's unsafe to crawl on. You still need to sound, but the camera can warn you of issues long before sounding in zero visibility. A few years back on a M/A job my crew was sent in on search behind the already advances line. Using a TIC, just a few feet in we could see the nozzleman and officer and just in front of them a large hole into the basement. We were able to pull them back to the door and abandon the entry without incident. They had no idea how close to a hole they were. Definitely not lightweight construction! I'm sorry FFFORD but I must note I'd be concerned with letting a one year man use the TIC. How much practical camera time do you have? And how much "Oh Sh*t" I have dead batteries experience do you have searching without a camera. Everyone must remember to back up the camera with basic search techniques of situational awareness, and knowing how to get out in zero visibility. If you don't have the basics mastered, the camera becomes a dangerous crutch.

When I think "Civilian Security Force" I think Militia. So I'm happy to see the President Elect changing his tune on the Second Amendment.

Bingo! We do plenty of these runs and we gain entry by the quickest and least damaging means. You still need to use the best tool on the job "Your Noggin!" Each dispatch needs to be evaluated for the level of concern for the patient. As someone noted, we never leave until the address is checked or the patient is found. Our ambulances do carry a set of irons, so most of the time their in quick. An engine will respond to assist or make "repairs". Though they're usually on the run anyway as they get sent on all unconscious patient runs. Our policy is to always call PD, but we don't wait for them to arrive unless the situation calls for it? (this might be sketchy). Also, as previously said, most well being checks start with PD, so their there already. We've yet to have anyone complain about the damage caused, though we do try and do everything we can to limit damage and restore functionality.

A few thing to comment on here: 1. Independent testing or validated testing is expensive, but poor promotional processes tend to be very expensive. In a volunteer FD, maybe this can go unchecked but, a poor officer can have a severe effect on a small FD. If we believe our people are are strongest assets, then ensuring they're led by qualified officers is worth the money. We pay a testing company to develop a validated test using the books we require and our SOP's. Off the top of my head our Lt's reading list: Fire Officer's Handbook of Tactics (largest percentage of questions) IFSTA Co. Officer, our SOP's, Brunancini's Customer Service book, and maybe 2 more. 2. Bnechis is right on with the difficulty of officership in Combo FD's. We have had a "rank is rank" policy for as long as I know of, but different standards for Call Division Officers and Career Officers. We also only had Captains in the call ranks and all FT CO's are Lt's. Recently we sat down with all the officers and reminded them that rank = responsibility. If you're a call Capt. with less experience than a FT Lt. you might consider if you want to assume command or not, but they need to remember that they're responsible either way. We're now getting rid of all call Capt's and Lt's through attrition. We will have call officers but in the future they'll be required to take the same tests, which is a tall order but really the only way.

Delete #4 and you've got a decent promotions process. Anytime you have the membership choosing their leaders, you'll have problems. With #4 in place, it would seem that steps 1-3 would only serve to weed out candidates to vote on. Promote the best person after #3. Sometimes the system lets people through that can't lead, a set of probationary requirements could go a long way to help this. The only thing I'd add is to publish the reading list for each promotions process way before the process is needed. Firefighters shouldn't start studying on the day they here of the vacancy, they should constantly be studying. Our FD maintains the lists of books for each promotion and changes are only allowed 6 months before a process. So if we add or change a book then have a vacancy before the 6 months, the "old" list stands. This also ensure the process can be assembled and employed as soon as the vacancy occurs. No study period before the test.

Not from Waco are you? Guns and Bible camp? Sounds like a cult to me!!

If I might weigh in here. Again, we're talking typical single or two family dwellings: Sending guys in ahead of the line is certainly not the most common way its done by the majority of FD's in my area, though is the most common way we conduct our operations. One of the key elements to having the truck or in our case the duty officer and hopefully his partner, ahead of the line is that we're basing our safety on the line being rapidly deployed and charged. Any delay in water to the nozzle must be communicated to ensure this crew can back out or get to a point of relative safety. In my FD most of the time the first in crew (without a line) finds the fire, communicates the location and best route to the the engine crew and starts the search often going above the fire. This crew doesn't enter the fire area, leaving it for the engine crew who knows they're responsible for the search of this area. The crew without the line must ensure they are not between the line and the fire. The stairs are generally found very near the front door and the charged line quickly can cut off fire and heat travel up the same vertical opening. When we have a crew above the fire without a line the first line's priority is not extinguishment but protection of the means of egress. Sometime extinguishing the fire is the best way to do this, but sometimes just holding the fire is safer for the crew above. Again, sending guys in ahead of the line should be reserved for companies and personnel who have quality training and decent experience, very much like VES.

Very good points Chief. I failed to detail all points of our SOG, which gives some leeway for large Mc Mansions and fires in where the fire is more than two floors from the point of entry. As for 1 and 2 family dwellings of typical size 1000-2500 sqft. we felt that charging the line at the door rarely would slow the attack and ensures proper water to the line before guys are in under the smoke. We may be putting to much on paper? Which is one school of thought here, but our SOG's are written in a "playbook" fashion and are utilized as training lesson plans as well, so it's hard to leave stuff out, especially with mixed staffing as we're a combination FD. Larger dwellings, multi-family and commercial fires have different SOG's that allow us to take advantage of code required separations and other common building features. In the case of our SOG's, they are just that - guidelines used to ensure our personnel and officers are on the same page, from training, to the response and making the attack. If the SOG is violated, the officer or firefighter is first asked if they know the SOG, and why they felt the need to stray. All reasonable answers are acceptable, but we do hold personnel accountable to know the SOG first. SOP's or Rules and Regs are more "binding" and discipline is meted out for violations of them. As for using smoke as the indicator as to when to charge the line. I might allow this in an all career setting. This is not a slam on POC or volunteers, but a recognition of those who run all the time to smells and bells, BS food on the stove and are always the first in at structure fires. The career guys in our FD get way more training and experience reading smoke. Some POC guys are very good, but not enough of them to allow our combo FD to put a policy in place. Our policies must protect as close to 100% of our people as possible. This makes them (SOP's/SOG's) part of the lowest common denominator theory. Some of us need to have tighter SOG's/SOP's due to our staffing and lowest common training/experience denominator. Sh*T happens to career people too though, look at Colhrain. OH this past spring. Two career firefighters died in a single family dwelling. They had not charged their line before entry and when they found the fire there was radio confusion, and water issues which lead to their not getting water and being trapped and killed. Surely there were other issues, but in this case the charged line may have made the difference.

We're in the process of rewriting our residential fire SOG. Draft form regarding entry into 1 or 2 family dwellings: *1.75" line (150 gpm min.) to the front door, charged and bled at the door where the fire is less than 3 stories above the level of entry. *Facepieces will be donned at the same point the line is charged. SCBA masks shall be charged when smoke conditions are encountered. Most of the time this will be upon donning the mask to prevent "fogging up".

Maybe none. Residential sprinklers are less prone to false alarms than commercial ones, as they are used in conjunction with smoke detectors but not necessarily interconnected. And residential smoke detection in 1 and 2 family is not required to report to the FD. Many newer residential sprinkler systems are interconnected with the regular plumbing making flow indicators impossible and do not require air as they're wet systems. This is a significant milestone for the fire service in making homes safer. Any firefighter worth his salt ought to be able to speak with some authority on the subject to allay peoples fears and help them understand the value.

It's hard to disagree with anything in Bnechis' post. (I originally meant the first one, but he snuck that second one in and I the same goes for that one too ) Given what many of us consider a lack of adequate firefighter training it seems counterproductive to mandate further training that might cause folks to walk away. We need to recruit, then retain new firefighters and more mandated training that is further from the reason they came is not a great way of keeping them. I'd also be concerned with mandated training leading to a "duty to act" which could create some issues for folks trying to skirt potential EMS patients to "get inside". But... Our first priority is rescue. It's hard to imagine not being able to render basic first aid to someone who has a serious need. A "duty to act" might get in the way of weighing serious need for medical attention vs. waiting for EMS for a victim with minor injuries. Given this I'm more of a proponent of very basic first aid and AED training for all, with no license or cert card attached. This allows the FD to set their policy on how aid is rendered without totally neglecting the victims until EMS arrives. Also the benefit of being able to help a brother or sister if they experience a sudden cardiac event is a realistic scenario.

While I understand having some concern, either NY is behind the times or you may not understand M/A. In Maine, it is very clear that as a FD requesting and utilizing M/A personnel I am responsible for their well being on the fireground. I am not responsible to prove or disprove their status, that is the Chief of the incoming dept's responsibility. If I had to worry about physicals and training standards of the M/A companies we'd never call any, period. Similarly I am responsible to ensure that no one from my FD does anything they're not qualified for. I would agree that in civil case everyone would be named in the lawsuit, but in y state as the chief officer receiving M/A, I'd be cleared fairly quickly, it would be the chief of the injured party's FD that would swing.

Can you find the source of this? It seems ridiculous on the surface, but often in a Union shop there is a legitimate reason. For example, maybe the City of Peabody gave all non-essential employees the day off, but of course firement and police had to work, therefore they would normally be entitled to some sort of extra pay. Our City does this for certain days. If City Hall is closed by council order and employees given the day with pay , all our personnel receive 24 hours of comp time. But, if it's just PPD asking for 9/11 to be recognized as a paid holiday I think they're way off base.

As has been said already: First line through the front door of the house. Why? Because it always goes thereon single family dwellings. Yep, "always" as this is the best way to rapidly put a line between the fire and occupants or the main path of egress. In the case of an attached garage fire, this crew must determine quickly if the separation between the house and garage is intact. If the fire is contained without extension, the first crew stands fast, in a position of safety where they can rapidly put water into the door should it fail. The second line, likely a 2.5" with a smoothbore attacks the fire directly. If possible this may be done through a window in the garage allowing the use of the main door for ventilation. Any form of horizontal vent should be enough to allow for knockdown, as we've written off anyone in the garage and are not immediately entering ourselves. This tactic can and has been used with 6-8 personnel arriving within the first 10 minutes. Depending on first due numbers and the visibility, we might check for the separation/extension without a line and hit the fire with the gun if there was no extension and the wall/door remained firmly intact.(that's asking a lot) If there is a failure between the house and garage then its just like attacking a residential house fire with a large fireload on the end. Same rules apply. First line goes through the front door, protects egress, occupants and searchers. Crews search the areas of most danger first proceeding away to safer areas, a second line backs up the first and the attack proceeds from the house side toward the garage. I cannot see advocating attacking the fire in the garage directly if you cannot be certain the separation remains intact. I have seen a FD take a small garage fire and push it right into the house and destroy the whole place because the door to the attached kitchen had failed.

Depending on the size and operations of the FD the "jack of all trades, master of none" can be a large problem or somewhat insignificant factor. Those FD's staffed such that they can utilize traditional Engine/Truck concepts should reap the benefit of dedicated crews. It's hard to argue that companies with less responsibilities will be better at those they do have. On the other hand, if we were inclined to buy a quint (not at all reality) our crews wouldn't see much change as they already rotate between apparatus due to EMS volume and putting in time on the bus.

This is exactly how our Combo FD works. Any reported structure fire or Box in high hazard occupancies is a full FD report call. Our personnel mostly report to the station, and this initial alarm (First Alarm here) also call in all off duty (OT Baby!!) Would I rather have an larger all career staff? Sure, not because I don't trust our like our POC crew but I'll take a crew that works together day after day anytime for their ability to work without the same amount of direction. But, alas that's not close to a reality, so we use our POC and off duty personnel quite a bit.