Re: Fighterfighters and Victims

[Guest guest]

> A couple of questions from Thursday night's EMT-B class.

> You're right. It's the medicolegal chapter.

>

> Question #1. Does the firefighter in the following scenario have a

> legal responsibility to provide care to the child if a) the

> firefighter is e.g., an EMT-B, but who is responding to this

incident

> only as a firefighter or the firefighter has no prehospital

> care certification? Does the firefighter in a) or have a legal

> responsibility to care for this child just because they are a

> firefighter and removed the child from the debris?

This is a difficult question for me since I am not well-versed in the

various acts/laws regarding fire saftey and the appropriate actions of

fire-fighters. My best educated guess would be if the firefighter is

serving as a first-responder, they have a responsibility to render

care within their scope of practice, especially if the transport crew

is not onscene yet. If I'm not mistaken and I welcome anyone to

correct me if I'm wrong, the Texas Fire Commission requires anyone

that wishes to become fire certified to be at least an Emergency Care

Attendant.

>

> Question #2. Is the firefighter's request that the EMT-P care

> for the child sufficient grounds for the paramedic to treat the

child

> under implied consent?

Yes. They have a responsibility to treat/transport. If the child's

guardian(s) are unavailable, the realm they treat under is implied

consent.

Regards,

Alfonso R. Ochoa

[Guest guest]

Texas requires all FFs to be EMT-Bs, at least all the fire academies here

wont admit anyone who isn't a basic.

as far as the care goes, if I recall correctly, there in implied consent,

you could also get consent from a police officer also I think in a situation

like that but I think it is mainly implied consent.

Fighterfighters and Victims

> A couple of questions from Thursday night's EMT-B class.

> You're right. It's the medicolegal chapter.

>

> Question #1. Does the firefighter in the following scenario have a

> legal responsibility to provide care to the child if a) the

> firefighter is e.g., an EMT-B, but who is responding to this incident

> only as a firefighter or the firefighter has no prehospital

> care certification? Does the firefighter in a) or have a legal

> responsibility to care for this child just because they are a

> firefighter and removed the child from the debris?

>

> Question #2. Is the firefighter's request that the EMT-P care

> for the child sufficient grounds for the paramedic to treat the child

> under implied consent?

>

> Scenario: Fire and EMS respond to let's say a wreck. There is

> no one present or who can be contacted by phone to consent to care

> for a child removed from the wreckage. It is obvious that the child

> needs care. A firefighter removes the child from the wreck; carries

> the child to a paramedic; and asks the paramedic to render care.

>

> Bob in McGregor

> LP

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

Very simply, an FF/ECA (or FF/EMT) on the scene of a wreck and not directed

by his Co. officer to fulfill another job (i.e. man a charged line for

extrication or abate fluids), should render care to all patients in concert

with EMS. As a medical FRO, it is implied that all FF personnel are on

" loan " to EMS and act under their purview unless otherwise directed by their

Officer. That being said, no FF should just pick up a child and carry

him/her to EMS personnel without performing an assessment first (unless, of

course, there is imminent danger to the patients and the operation. fire,

explosion, landslide, etc.).

Mike

Fighterfighters and Victims

A couple of questions from Thursday night's EMT-B class.

You're right. It's the medicolegal chapter.

Question #1. Does the firefighter in the following scenario have a

legal responsibility to provide care to the child if a) the

firefighter is e.g., an EMT-B, but who is responding to this incident

only as a firefighter or the firefighter has no prehospital

care certification? Does the firefighter in a) or have a legal

responsibility to care for this child just because they are a

firefighter and removed the child from the debris?

Question #2. Is the firefighter's request that the EMT-P care

for the child sufficient grounds for the paramedic to treat the child

under implied consent?

Scenario: Fire and EMS respond to let's say a wreck. There is

no one present or who can be contacted by phone to consent to care

for a child removed from the wreckage. It is obvious that the child

needs care. A firefighter removes the child from the wreck; carries

the child to a paramedic; and asks the paramedic to render care.

Bob in McGregor

LP

_____