Should First Responder Training Be Mandatory For Both Career And Volunteer Firefighters?

[x635 4,066]

I'm a proponent of making First Responder certification mandatory for all career and volunteer firefighters, regardless if they respond on EMS calls or not.

There's often times where a firefighter will be presented with an EMS situation, and wants to help, but really has no clue what to do but wait for EMS. In an area where EMS is often stretched thin, I feel it's crucial.

I know many Career FF's have to be a certified First Responder (included in academy) or are required to be EMT's, but Volunteer's face the same situations and there's no reason why they shouldn't have this training also.

Having this training will also benefit EMS, as we can get vitals as we arrive on the scene, and in some cases, pt packaged, etc.

And, no offense to firefighters, depending on the department, the EMS training may get used more than the FF training!

[gamewell45 258]

I don't think it should be a requirement; there are some people who'd be useless in a emergency medical situation as they may have no stomach for blood & guts, etc. I think keeping it voluntary is the way to go.

[OoO 24]

EMS involves much more than blood and guts. For just one example, A FF could be called on to help someone with a seizure. Even if the skills never get used, its always good to know.

[Danger 160]

I agree. EMS is such a big part of fire today and even in a volunteer system there are many occasions where fire equipment could be first on a scene. Or in event of MCI. Maybe not even NYS CFR but first aid and CPR/AED.

[Bnechis 3,961]

I don't think it should be a requirement; there are some people who'd be useless in a emergency medical situation as they may have no stomach for blood & guts, etc. I think keeping it voluntary is the way to go.

Since we still (as a state) dont require adequate training of volunteers to respond to fires, doesn't that make some of them useless in a fire situation?

While I strongly agree that all FF's should know what to do if a fellow FF drops at a fire or they respond to MVA's, I think to many volunteers do not have enough training to go on fire calls and that needs to be the priority.

Also I have seen way to many ff's "cut up" a car with no knowledge of how this may affect the patient. In almost every case FF/EMT's do a better job of extrication, since they are not just cutting up the car.

[gamewell45 258]

Since we still (as a state) dont require adequate training of volunteers to respond to fires, doesn't that make some of them useless in a fire situation?

No, I don't agree with your response; the question of adequate training of volunteers is certainly open to debate, with the paid firemen taking one position on training and volunteers taking another position. Either way whatever the paid firemen's position on training obviously works for them and the volunteers position on training for them works quite well. And of course those volunteers who feel they need more training are encouraged to take the various training courses they want. LIkewise i'm confident that if a paid fireman wanted additional training the department wouldn't hold him back from it.

And to answer the last part of your question, every fireman, no matter what training he has, can be used to the abilities that he has been trained for so i likewise would disagree with your rationale.

[IzzyEng4 427]

Remember guys and gals, when we are called into duty, a patient doesn't know whether or not you are certified a first responder or not. They see you and think "finally help is here". But what's happens when you can't render them any help because of this and you have to tell them you can't help because your not trained to do that???? The public do not see us that way, we are a looked at as a "jack of all trades" when it comes to public safety especially since we are portrayed that way in the media. Sorry with the sue happy people out there I rather be certified as a first responder and not having to face a court where I refused help just because I wasn't certified.

Being certified at least CPR / AED / first aid or to the MRT level is a CYA action and I believe everyone should have some sort of training. What about if it was one of your own fellow firefighters who got hurt or is having a cardiac arrest while operating at the "big one" and you need to render assistance? Would you do nothing and just stand there???? I know I wouldn't and that should be the same towards the public.

Every firefighter and police officer should be certified at least to the minimum first responder level of CPR / First aid.

[gamewell45 258]

Remember guys and gals, when we are called into duty, a patient doesn't know whether or not you are certified a first responder or not. They see you and think "finally help is here". But what's happens when you can't render them any help because of this and you have to tell them you can't help because your not trained to do that???? The public do not see us that way, we are a looked at as a "jack of all trades" when it comes to public safety especially since we are portrayed that way in the media. Sorry with the sue happy people out there I rather be certified as a first responder and not having to face a court where I refused help just because I wasn't certified.

Being certified at least CPR / AED / first aid or to the MRT level is a CYA action and I believe everyone should have some sort of training. What about if it was one of your own fellow firefighters who got hurt or is having a cardiac arrest while operating at the "big one" and you need to render assistance? Would you do nothing and just stand there???? I know I wouldn't and that should be the same towards the public.

Every firefighter and police officer should be certified at least to the minimum first responder level of CPR / First aid.

My response would be "medical assistance is on the way" and i've done it plenty of times with no grief from the public. LIkewise i'm not worried about lawsuits; if you go through life with that mentality, you'd be afraid to open your front door and go outside. The public may see us as a "jack of all trades" but they need to be educated that this isn't the case. Not every fire agency provides medical assistance; thats why they have volunteer Ambulance corps or paid ambulance services.

To require everyone to be able to administer first aid as a CPR/First Aid Level is not only unfair, it could be dangerous particularly if the person arrives on the scene and starts or attempts working on a patient and for whatever reason can't stomach what he is doing or has to do and freezes up. Then how does your fire department look to the public??? You could mandate first aid training for every single emergency response person on the planet, but there will be some who don't have the stomach for it and can't deal with another person in pain; Thats why you have EMT's and paramedics; they are trained to do this type of work because they have the stomach and desire for it . You could say what if this and what if that? but you can't prepare for every eventuality. What comes easy to you may not to another. We all have to work within the scope of our knowledge and training and if the fireman wants to become a CPR certified, CFR, or EMT/ Paramedic, then so be it, but to require mandatory training is unfeasible and i suspect that many departments would never allow it nor would the state allow it to become law for the above reasons.

[x635 4,066]

You could mandate first aid training for every single emergency response person on the planet, but there will be some who don't have the stomach for it and can't deal with another person in pain; Thats why you have EMT's and paramedics; they are trained to do this type of work because they have the stomach and desire for it . .

But firefighters can handle rescuing severly burned people from buildings, extricated victims who've suffered major trauma from motor vehicles, and give EMS the occasional "lift assiist". Where is the difference of being able to administer oxygen to a chest pain patient, take an initial blood pressure, properly tiage so the right resources can be sent or cancelled.....help start the EMS process ASAP and in the meantime help to save the patients life.

The "can't stomach it" shouldn't be an issue, because, in that case, the firefighter is incapable of responding to a bunch of emergencies requiring firefighters, such as MVA's.

[helicopper 1,050]

I don't think it should be a requirement; there are some people who'd be useless in a emergency medical situation as they may have no stomach for blood & guts, etc. I think keeping it voluntary is the way to go.

That's a weak excuse. If they have no stomach for "blood and guts" how will they handle an extrication or other rescue call? How will they react if they happen upon an burn victim during a primary or secondary search in a fire? What if one of their colleagues is suddenly injured and bleeding?

All first responders (police, fire, and EMS) should be certified officially as CFR's. There's no reason NOT to do it! The big issue will be once certified in their academy or probie school how do they keep their certification? Many departments (police, fire and EMS) turn a blind eye to ongoing, continuing education so for three years you're good but then what?

As for bnechis's comment about EMS providers being more insightful to the needs of the patient during an extrication, I happen to agree. There are entirely too many instances where a simple extrication becomes an AVET drill - at the patient's expense. There's no reason to cut the car up more than is necessary to safely and efficiently remove the victim but that's not always the mindset.

Izzy, I see your point but I have to say: screw CYA! What about being able to take care of each other if *it hits the proverbial fan?

[Goose 188]

My response would be "medical assistance is on the way" and i've done it plenty of times with no grief from the public. LIkewise i'm not worried about lawsuits; if you go through life with that mentality, you'd be afraid to open your front door and go outside. The public may see us as a "jack of all trades" but they need to be educated that this isn't the case. Not every fire agency provides medical assistance; thats why they have volunteer Ambulance corps or paid ambulance services.

To require everyone to be able to administer first aid as a CPR/First Aid Level is not only unfair, it could be dangerous particularly if the person arrives on the scene and starts or attempts working on a patient and for whatever reason can't stomach what he is doing or has to do and freezes up. Then how does your fire department look to the public??? You could mandate first aid training for every single emergency response person on the planet, but there will be some who don't have the stomach for it and can't deal with another person in pain; Thats why you have EMT's and paramedics; they are trained to do this type of work because they have the stomach and desire for it . You could say what if this and what if that? but you can't prepare for every eventuality. What comes easy to you may not to another. We all have to work within the scope of our knowledge and training and if the fireman wants to become a CPR certified, CFR, or EMT/ Paramedic, then so be it, but to require mandatory training is unfeasible and i suspect that many departments would never allow it nor would the state allow it to become law for the above reasons.

I'm not really sure i understand that, at all. What do you do if someone freezes up on an MVA preforming firematic duty with deceased victims? Is that unsafe and unfair?

I really dont understand what your getting at, if you could expand it would be appreciated.

[Bnechis 3,961]

My response would be "medical assistance is on the way" and i've done it plenty of times with no grief from the public.

Firefighter Down........."medical assistance is on the way" Is unaceptable!!!!

Not every fire agency provides medical assistance; thats why they have volunteer Ambulance corps or paid ambulance services.

Over 80% of EMS in the US is provided by Fire Depts. & most FD's provide some level of EMS.

To require everyone to be able to administer first aid as a CPR/First Aid Level is not only unfair, it could be dangerous particularly if the person arrives on the scene and starts or attempts working on a patient and for whatever reason can't stomach what he is doing or has to do and freezes up. Then how does your fire department look to the public???

Seattle has trained over 80% of its citizens to do CPR, is that "dangerous"? If a volunteer FF can't stomach going into a burning building and frezes up (or paces back and forth infront of the building) how does that look to the public? How dangerous is that?

Seattle FD has trained over 771,000 civilians in CPR.

You could mandate first aid training for every single emergency response person on the planet, but there will be some who don't have the stomach for it and can't deal with another person in pain; Thats why you have EMT's and paramedics; they are trained to do this type of work because they have the stomach and desire for it .

I've trained many EMT's who had never been on a call before they became an EMT, they would not know if they have the stomach or not. 90% of our career FF's had never been on a medical call before they were hired, they all became EMT's and in 20+ years I've only seen 2 or 3 (out of 100's) who had some issues, they still managed to get the job done.

We all have to work within the scope of our knowledge and training and if the fireman wants to become a CPR certified, CFR, or EMT/ Paramedic, then so be it, but to require mandatory training is unfeasible and i suspect that many departments would never allow it nor would the state allow it to become law for the above reasons.

Yes we need to work within our scope of knowledge and training, and this thread is asking if 1st responders should be trained? When you say mandatory training is unfeasible are you refering to medical training, fire training or rescue training?

I suspect that many depts have set the bar so low that you are right, its not the state its the lobbying efforts of groups that claim this will "hurt" communities.

[antiquefirelt 994]

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.

Edited October 25, 2008 by antiquefirelt

[helicopper 1,050]

My response would be "medical assistance is on the way" and i've done it plenty of times with no grief from the public. LIkewise i'm not worried about lawsuits; if you go through life with that mentality, you'd be afraid to open your front door and go outside. The public may see us as a "jack of all trades" but they need to be educated that this isn't the case. Not every fire agency provides medical assistance; thats why they have volunteer Ambulance corps or paid ambulance services.

To require everyone to be able to administer first aid as a CPR/First Aid Level is not only unfair, it could be dangerous particularly if the person arrives on the scene and starts or attempts working on a patient and for whatever reason can't stomach what he is doing or has to do and freezes up. Then how does your fire department look to the public??? You could mandate first aid training for every single emergency response person on the planet, but there will be some who don't have the stomach for it and can't deal with another person in pain; Thats why you have EMT's and paramedics; they are trained to do this type of work because they have the stomach and desire for it . You could say what if this and what if that? but you can't prepare for every eventuality. What comes easy to you may not to another. We all have to work within the scope of our knowledge and training and if the fireman wants to become a CPR certified, CFR, or EMT/ Paramedic, then so be it, but to require mandatory training is unfeasible and i suspect that many departments would never allow it nor would the state allow it to become law for the above reasons.

Gamewell, if you're against FD's doing EMS just say that. To suggest that a FF/CFR will "freeze up" when treating a patient is absurd. Will the same FF freeze up when attempting a rescue while inside a fire building? Again we see the disparity between voluntary and career agencies - all Police Officers and all career firefighters get CFR training in their academies - how many of them "freeze up" during an EMS assist?

Like it or not, we are all first responders - whether certified or not - and we should be doing more than standing there looking at someone saying "medical help is on the way". Why are you there in the first place if that's all you're going to do? You want to educate the public so they know what you DON'T do, huh? Be careful with that one or when budget season rolls around they'll ask how many calls are actually fire calls.

Nobody's suggesting making every FF a paramedic but knowing CPR and at the very least first aid is a small but meaningful requirement. It is disgusting to suggest that promoting minimum training standards such as this should be opposed by the fire lobby. If 51 hours is too much to ask of someone who is going to be coming to my (or my family's) assistance, time to rethink why you're doing this and what the bare minimum training requirements should be.

[helicopper 1,050]

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.

There has to be some standard and I don't think FD's are qualified to start developing their own medical training curricula. The CFR program is sound, it is relatively painless, and it serves the whole "entry level" first responder population. To do your own without any certification is asking for liability and while Gamewell and I agree that you can't live your life fearful of it, "doing your own thing" in the medical world is asking for trouble.

[Danger 160]

If you can't stomach what happens on 99% of EMS scenes you probably should not be involved in any sort of public safety position.

[Bnechis 3,961]

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.

When I traveled in England, I found it interesting that FF's were not EMT's...they were just "FF's" however during their academy they spent about 180 hours on medical training and used the Brady EMT text as the course book. In other words they completed EMT but were just considered firefighters. no extra patch, same thing as a FF/EMT here.

[gamewell45 258]

The "can't stomach it" shouldn't be an issue, because, in that case, the firefighter is incapable of responding to a bunch of emergencies requiring firefighters, such as MVA's.

Your right, it shouldn't normally be, but unfortunatley in some cases it will be. Some firefighters won't be directly at the accident scene but instead will be performing more support functions such as pumping, fire-police, lighting and so forth. Those that have no desire to become involved in vehicle extrication will never become certified on the hurst tool. Thats how they avoid getting too close to the scene.

[gamewell45 258]

If you can't stomach what happens on 99% of EMS scenes you probably should not be involved in any sort of public safety position.

I can't agree with that rationale of thinking; someone who can't handle certain types of EMS calls can still be of value on non-EMS scenes, such as firefighting and so forth. If the person can't handle 99% of EMS scenes, then he shouldn't respond on EMS Rescue calls and on fire scenes, just stay away from the person being treated. Understand that some people will be able to function on EMS scenes, such as extrication, but will not want to have any "hands on" involving a patient. Its not just black or white; your going to have gray areas depending on the persons ability to be in an EMS-type situation.

[Bnechis 3,961]

Those that have no desire to become involved in vehicle extrication will never become certified on the hurst tool. Thats how they avoid getting too close to the scene.

Those same members should never be exposed to burn injuries, so they will never become certified in firefighting.

They should never be exposed to a FF in Cardiac Arrest, so they should never be certified in firepolice (I know of at least 2 firepolice cardiac's in NYS this year)

They should never be exposed to blood, so don't let them in the firehouse kitchen, since someone could get cut.

I guess they should never leave their homes, since they might be exposed to something they cant stomach.

[gamewell45 258]

Gamewell, if you're against FD's doing EMS just say that. To suggest that a FF/CFR will "freeze up" when treating a patient is absurd. Will the same FF freeze up when attempting a rescue while inside a fire building? Again we see the disparity between voluntary and career agencies - all Police Officers and all career firefighters get CFR training in their academies - how many of them "freeze up" during an EMS assist?

Like it or not, we are all first responders - whether certified or not - and we should be doing more than standing there looking at someone saying "medical help is on the way". Why are you there in the first place if that's all you're going to do? You want to educate the public so they know what you DON'T do, huh? Be careful with that one or when budget season rolls around they'll ask how many calls are actually fire calls.

Nobody's suggesting making every FF a paramedic but knowing CPR and at the very least first aid is a small but meaningful requirement. It is disgusting to suggest that promoting minimum training standards such as this should be opposed by the fire lobby. If 51 hours is too much to ask of someone who is going to be coming to my (or my family's) assistance, time to rethink why you're doing this and what the bare minimum training requirements should be.

Chris, I think your looking at this from an entirely different angle then I am. First off I am not under any circumstances suggesting that FD should not be against FD's doing EMS type work. What i'm saying is that its quite possible in some situtations depending on the person, that if involunarily made to become certified as a "CFR/CPR, first Aider, and so forth, that person might not be of much value on an EMS scene. He/she might not have the stomach for direct patient contact. Even if you are first on the scene, you can most certainly let them know that medical help is on the way and in the meantime, relay important information to the responding agency, whether it be fire or EMS of the location of the patient, whether the patient appears to be in any kind of distress, whether the patient appears to be concious or not; whether the patient is bleeding and so forth without touching the patient.

Wouldn't you agree that its better to have someone voluntarily working on a patient as opposed to one who hates what he's doing, doesn't feel comfortable having hands on, fainting if he sees blood and can't stand the sight of it? or he's doing cpr and feels the ribs break and passes out on top of the patient? or vomits when he smells or witnesses someone else vomit. This is what i'm talking about, i realize that with proper training in cpr and first aid 95% of most firemen can likely handle EMS calls, but there are a few who woudln't be able to and thats what i'm referring to. This has nothing to do with the so-called 51 hours of training. There happens to be a human element involved here. Its basic common sense.

Being honest with the public is alot more respectable then deliberatly misleading them. Finally while you might find it "disgusting to suggest that promoting minimum training standards such as this should be opposed by the fire lobby", you need to be a little more realistic and take into consideration that not everyone is capable of doing ems work

[gamewell45 258]

Those same members should never be exposed to burn injuries, so they will never become certified in firefighting.

They should never be exposed to a FF in Cardiac Arrest, so they should never be certified in firepolice (I know of at least 2 firepolice cardiac's in NYS this year)

They should never be exposed to blood, so don't let them in the firehouse kitchen, since someone could get cut.

I guess they should never leave their homes, since they might be exposed to something they cant stomach.

I understand your position, but I think we are in agreement that we disagree.