Re: Baystar medic arrested at scene in La Porte

[Guest guest]

Sorry bout that, I did mean Baystar, not Baytown. It's what I

get for not taking my own advice about proofreading before sending.

Crosby

EMT-B

RE: Re: Baystar medic arrested at scene in La

Porte

Hello .

Let's not reference this event to " Baytown Paramedics " please. Baytown

did

not respond to this event and are definitely not involved.

Jack Pitcock

EMS Division Manager

Baytown Health Department EMS

________________________________________________________________________________\

_____

This email and its attachments, if any, are intended for the personal use of the

named recipient(s) and may contain confidential, privileged, or proprietary

information. If you are not a named recipient, or an agent responsible for

delivering it to a named recipient, you have received this email in error. In

that event, please (a) immediately notify me by reply email, ( do not review,

copy, save, forward, or print this email or any of its attachments, and ©

immediately delete and/or destroy this email and its attachments and all

electronic and physical copies thereof. Thank you.

________________________________________________________________________________\

_____

[Guest guest]

Can't blame you there pal....

________________________________

From: [mailto: ] On

Behalf Of Jack Pitcock

Sent: Saturday, December 31, 2005 12:17 PM

To:

Subject: RE: Re: Baystar medic arrested at scene in La

Porte

No problem..

This has turned into an EMS Managers nightmare (on BOTH sides), and I

don't

want to even be close!

Jack

_____

From: [mailto: ] On

Behalf Of Crosby, E

Sent: Saturday, December 31, 2005 12:07 PM

To:

Subject: RE: Re: Baystar medic arrested at scene in La

Porte

Sorry bout that, I did mean Baystar, not Baytown. It's what I

get for not taking my own advice about proofreading before sending.

Crosby

EMT-B

RE: Re: Baystar medic arrested at scene in La

Porte

Hello .

Let's not reference this event to " Baytown Paramedics " please. Baytown

did

not respond to this event and are definitely not involved.

Jack Pitcock

EMS Division Manager

Baytown Health Department EMS

________________________________________________________________________

____

_________

This email and its attachments, if any, are intended for the personal

use of

the named recipient(s) and may contain confidential, privileged, or

proprietary information. If you are not a named recipient, or an agent

responsible for delivering it to a named recipient, you have received

this

email in error. In that event, please (a) immediately notify me by

reply

email, ( do not review, copy, save, forward, or print this email or

any of

its attachments, and © immediately delete and/or destroy this email

and

its attachments and all electronic and physical copies thereof. Thank

you.

________________________________________________________________________

____

_________

[Guest guest]

Can't blame you there pal....

________________________________

From: [mailto: ] On

Behalf Of Jack Pitcock

Sent: Saturday, December 31, 2005 12:17 PM

To:

Subject: RE: Re: Baystar medic arrested at scene in La

Porte

No problem..

This has turned into an EMS Managers nightmare (on BOTH sides), and I

don't

want to even be close!

Jack

_____

From: [mailto: ] On

Behalf Of Crosby, E

Sent: Saturday, December 31, 2005 12:07 PM

To:

Subject: RE: Re: Baystar medic arrested at scene in La

Porte

Sorry bout that, I did mean Baystar, not Baytown. It's what I

get for not taking my own advice about proofreading before sending.

Crosby

EMT-B

RE: Re: Baystar medic arrested at scene in La

Porte

Hello .

Let's not reference this event to " Baytown Paramedics " please. Baytown

did

not respond to this event and are definitely not involved.

Jack Pitcock

EMS Division Manager

Baytown Health Department EMS

________________________________________________________________________

____

_________

This email and its attachments, if any, are intended for the personal

use of

the named recipient(s) and may contain confidential, privileged, or

proprietary information. If you are not a named recipient, or an agent

responsible for delivering it to a named recipient, you have received

this

email in error. In that event, please (a) immediately notify me by

reply

email, ( do not review, copy, save, forward, or print this email or

any of

its attachments, and © immediately delete and/or destroy this email

and

its attachments and all electronic and physical copies thereof. Thank

you.

________________________________________________________________________

____

_________

[Guest guest]

Can't blame you there pal....

________________________________

From: [mailto: ] On

Behalf Of Jack Pitcock

Sent: Saturday, December 31, 2005 12:17 PM

To:

Subject: RE: Re: Baystar medic arrested at scene in La

Porte

No problem..

This has turned into an EMS Managers nightmare (on BOTH sides), and I

don't

want to even be close!

Jack

_____

From: [mailto: ] On

Behalf Of Crosby, E

Sent: Saturday, December 31, 2005 12:07 PM

To:

Subject: RE: Re: Baystar medic arrested at scene in La

Porte

Sorry bout that, I did mean Baystar, not Baytown. It's what I

get for not taking my own advice about proofreading before sending.

Crosby

EMT-B

RE: Re: Baystar medic arrested at scene in La

Porte

Hello .

Let's not reference this event to " Baytown Paramedics " please. Baytown

did

not respond to this event and are definitely not involved.

Jack Pitcock

EMS Division Manager

Baytown Health Department EMS

________________________________________________________________________

____

_________

This email and its attachments, if any, are intended for the personal

use of

the named recipient(s) and may contain confidential, privileged, or

proprietary information. If you are not a named recipient, or an agent

responsible for delivering it to a named recipient, you have received

this

email in error. In that event, please (a) immediately notify me by

reply

email, ( do not review, copy, save, forward, or print this email or

any of

its attachments, and © immediately delete and/or destroy this email

and

its attachments and all electronic and physical copies thereof. Thank

you.

________________________________________________________________________

____

_________

[Guest guest]

No problem..

This has turned into an EMS Managers nightmare (on BOTH sides), and I don't

want to even be close!

Jack

_____

From: [mailto: ] On

Behalf Of Crosby, E

Sent: Saturday, December 31, 2005 12:07 PM

To:

Subject: RE: Re: Baystar medic arrested at scene in La Porte

Sorry bout that, I did mean Baystar, not Baytown. It's what I

get for not taking my own advice about proofreading before sending.

Crosby

EMT-B

RE: Re: Baystar medic arrested at scene in La

Porte

Hello .

Let's not reference this event to " Baytown Paramedics " please. Baytown

did

not respond to this event and are definitely not involved.

Jack Pitcock

EMS Division Manager

Baytown Health Department EMS

____________________________________________________________________________

_________

This email and its attachments, if any, are intended for the personal use of

the named recipient(s) and may contain confidential, privileged, or

proprietary information. If you are not a named recipient, or an agent

responsible for delivering it to a named recipient, you have received this

email in error. In that event, please (a) immediately notify me by reply

email, ( do not review, copy, save, forward, or print this email or any of

its attachments, and © immediately delete and/or destroy this email and

its attachments and all electronic and physical copies thereof. Thank you.

____________________________________________________________________________

_________

[Guest guest]

No problem..

This has turned into an EMS Managers nightmare (on BOTH sides), and I don't

want to even be close!

Jack

_____

From: [mailto: ] On

Behalf Of Crosby, E

Sent: Saturday, December 31, 2005 12:07 PM

To:

Subject: RE: Re: Baystar medic arrested at scene in La Porte

Sorry bout that, I did mean Baystar, not Baytown. It's what I

get for not taking my own advice about proofreading before sending.

Crosby

EMT-B

RE: Re: Baystar medic arrested at scene in La

Porte

Hello .

Let's not reference this event to " Baytown Paramedics " please. Baytown

did

not respond to this event and are definitely not involved.

Jack Pitcock

EMS Division Manager

Baytown Health Department EMS

____________________________________________________________________________

_________

This email and its attachments, if any, are intended for the personal use of

the named recipient(s) and may contain confidential, privileged, or

proprietary information. If you are not a named recipient, or an agent

responsible for delivering it to a named recipient, you have received this

email in error. In that event, please (a) immediately notify me by reply

email, ( do not review, copy, save, forward, or print this email or any of

its attachments, and © immediately delete and/or destroy this email and

its attachments and all electronic and physical copies thereof. Thank you.

____________________________________________________________________________

_________

[Guest guest]

No problem..

This has turned into an EMS Managers nightmare (on BOTH sides), and I don't

want to even be close!

Jack

_____

From: [mailto: ] On

Behalf Of Crosby, E

Sent: Saturday, December 31, 2005 12:07 PM

To:

Subject: RE: Re: Baystar medic arrested at scene in La Porte

Sorry bout that, I did mean Baystar, not Baytown. It's what I

get for not taking my own advice about proofreading before sending.

Crosby

EMT-B

RE: Re: Baystar medic arrested at scene in La

Porte

Hello .

Let's not reference this event to " Baytown Paramedics " please. Baytown

did

not respond to this event and are definitely not involved.

Jack Pitcock

EMS Division Manager

Baytown Health Department EMS

____________________________________________________________________________

_________

This email and its attachments, if any, are intended for the personal use of

the named recipient(s) and may contain confidential, privileged, or

proprietary information. If you are not a named recipient, or an agent

responsible for delivering it to a named recipient, you have received this

email in error. In that event, please (a) immediately notify me by reply

email, ( do not review, copy, save, forward, or print this email or any of

its attachments, and © immediately delete and/or destroy this email and

its attachments and all electronic and physical copies thereof. Thank you.

____________________________________________________________________________

_________

[Guest guest]

My guess is that the DSHS person talking to was speaking of DSHS

regulations and not claims under tort law.

-Wes

In a message dated 1/1/2006 12:40:09 PM Central Standard Time,

THEDUDMAN@... writes:

Been watching this one for a while...seems we might be talking about

semantics here...not aware of the definition for negligence saying you

had to receive a 911 call...I believe the plaintiff had to prove you

had a " duty to act " and that seems easy to prove if someone calls

(phone, cell phone, smoke signals,etc) and you say " I'll be there " .

Maybe it was the electrician and he didn't show up and the house went

up in flames killing 2 kids...he didn't have a 911 call but can he be

sued for negligence? This one is above me...Wes??? Dearly departed

Gene???

Dudley

Re: Baystar medic arrested at scene in La Porte

P.S. The way it was explained to me by the regional director for

DSHS

South was that if you received a call for an emergent call, and you

had a unit available, you had a duty to act even if you are a private

for proffit, and don't run regular 911. The only exception to the

rule is if you find another service to run the call for you

in " reasonable " time. It's one of those things that depending on who

you talk to, you get a different story.

Later and god night,

CB

Yahoo! Groups Links

[Guest guest]

My guess is that the DSHS person talking to was speaking of DSHS

regulations and not claims under tort law.

-Wes

In a message dated 1/1/2006 12:40:09 PM Central Standard Time,

THEDUDMAN@... writes:

Been watching this one for a while...seems we might be talking about

semantics here...not aware of the definition for negligence saying you

had to receive a 911 call...I believe the plaintiff had to prove you

had a " duty to act " and that seems easy to prove if someone calls

(phone, cell phone, smoke signals,etc) and you say " I'll be there " .

Maybe it was the electrician and he didn't show up and the house went

up in flames killing 2 kids...he didn't have a 911 call but can he be

sued for negligence? This one is above me...Wes??? Dearly departed

Gene???

Dudley

Re: Baystar medic arrested at scene in La Porte

P.S. The way it was explained to me by the regional director for

DSHS

South was that if you received a call for an emergent call, and you

had a unit available, you had a duty to act even if you are a private

for proffit, and don't run regular 911. The only exception to the

rule is if you find another service to run the call for you

in " reasonable " time. It's one of those things that depending on who

you talk to, you get a different story.

Later and god night,

CB

Yahoo! Groups Links

[Guest guest]

My guess is that the DSHS person talking to was speaking of DSHS

regulations and not claims under tort law.

-Wes

In a message dated 1/1/2006 12:40:09 PM Central Standard Time,

THEDUDMAN@... writes:

Been watching this one for a while...seems we might be talking about

semantics here...not aware of the definition for negligence saying you

had to receive a 911 call...I believe the plaintiff had to prove you

had a " duty to act " and that seems easy to prove if someone calls

(phone, cell phone, smoke signals,etc) and you say " I'll be there " .

Maybe it was the electrician and he didn't show up and the house went

up in flames killing 2 kids...he didn't have a 911 call but can he be

sued for negligence? This one is above me...Wes??? Dearly departed

Gene???

Dudley

Re: Baystar medic arrested at scene in La Porte

P.S. The way it was explained to me by the regional director for

DSHS

South was that if you received a call for an emergent call, and you

had a unit available, you had a duty to act even if you are a private

for proffit, and don't run regular 911. The only exception to the

rule is if you find another service to run the call for you

in " reasonable " time. It's one of those things that depending on who

you talk to, you get a different story.

Later and god night,

CB

Yahoo! Groups Links

[Guest guest]

Mike,

Sorry...but you left the door open on this one. " This is why 911

services should be governmental " ...so all these municipal 911 agencies

are doing things perfect across the state and all municipal 911 are

superior to private performance contracted 911 agencies because as the

government...they never have any level of service issues, customer

complaints, or performance problems...

Or is the issue that as a governmental agency, they are much more

insulated from all of this and can ignore/refuse to change much longer

since there is no pesky contract to fear losing...I mean after

all...the gov'ment is just here to help...not make an evil profit or

" gasp " be efficient.

My opinion: It doesn't matter how the system is constructed or who

provides 911 services...if there is no oversight, no performance

measures, and no concern as to the feelings and expectations of our

customers, then the system will be horrible...no matter who owns it.

Dudley

Re: Re: Baystar medic arrested at scene in La

Porte

Then the people in Harlingen need to get on their government to hold

STEC's feet to the fire and put in better compliance measures for the

911 side of the fence.

This is why 911 services should be governmental, and should have

strict requirements on the provision of 911 vs transfer calls.

Mike

> Yeah you're right but it would not bring immediate

> results. It would probably take an act of God to

> remove these services. Here in Harlingen STEC does

> all transfers within city limits. No one can do a

> transfer initiating in Harlingen (residence). This in

> turn is hurting their 911 response. Anyway, I have

> come across alot of people not satisfied with the

> current service provided, not just in Harlingen, but

> in Laredo, Mc, Mission, etc. There is only one

> TDSHS rep covering from Willacy County to Laredo.

> That's over 100 services. So what's wrong with that

> picture?

> Salvador Capuchino Jr

> EMT-Paramedic

>

> --- Mike wrote:

>

> > On 12/30/05, salvador capuchino

> > wrote:

> > > 4. As a taxpayer I should be able to call who I

> > want

> > > when I want, if I am not happy with the service

> > > provided with the city.

> >

> > No you shouldn't. As a taxpayer, you should demand

> > better and get the

> > service you're paying for. What we DON'T need is a

> > " come-calling "

> > service, where whoever gets called comes. 911

> > service needs to be

> > provided in a controlled manner.

> >

> > Mike :/

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

[Guest guest]

Mike,

Sorry...but you left the door open on this one. " This is why 911

services should be governmental " ...so all these municipal 911 agencies

are doing things perfect across the state and all municipal 911 are

superior to private performance contracted 911 agencies because as the

government...they never have any level of service issues, customer

complaints, or performance problems...

Or is the issue that as a governmental agency, they are much more

insulated from all of this and can ignore/refuse to change much longer

since there is no pesky contract to fear losing...I mean after

all...the gov'ment is just here to help...not make an evil profit or

" gasp " be efficient.

My opinion: It doesn't matter how the system is constructed or who

provides 911 services...if there is no oversight, no performance

measures, and no concern as to the feelings and expectations of our

customers, then the system will be horrible...no matter who owns it.

Dudley

Re: Re: Baystar medic arrested at scene in La

Porte

Then the people in Harlingen need to get on their government to hold

STEC's feet to the fire and put in better compliance measures for the

911 side of the fence.

This is why 911 services should be governmental, and should have

strict requirements on the provision of 911 vs transfer calls.

Mike

> Yeah you're right but it would not bring immediate

> results. It would probably take an act of God to

> remove these services. Here in Harlingen STEC does

> all transfers within city limits. No one can do a

> transfer initiating in Harlingen (residence). This in

> turn is hurting their 911 response. Anyway, I have

> come across alot of people not satisfied with the

> current service provided, not just in Harlingen, but

> in Laredo, Mc, Mission, etc. There is only one

> TDSHS rep covering from Willacy County to Laredo.

> That's over 100 services. So what's wrong with that

> picture?

> Salvador Capuchino Jr

> EMT-Paramedic

>

> --- Mike wrote:

>

> > On 12/30/05, salvador capuchino

> > wrote:

> > > 4. As a taxpayer I should be able to call who I

> > want

> > > when I want, if I am not happy with the service

> > > provided with the city.

> >

> > No you shouldn't. As a taxpayer, you should demand

> > better and get the

> > service you're paying for. What we DON'T need is a

> > " come-calling "

> > service, where whoever gets called comes. 911

> > service needs to be

> > provided in a controlled manner.

> >

> > Mike :/

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

[Guest guest]

Mike,

Sorry...but you left the door open on this one. " This is why 911

services should be governmental " ...so all these municipal 911 agencies

are doing things perfect across the state and all municipal 911 are

superior to private performance contracted 911 agencies because as the

government...they never have any level of service issues, customer

complaints, or performance problems...

Or is the issue that as a governmental agency, they are much more

insulated from all of this and can ignore/refuse to change much longer

since there is no pesky contract to fear losing...I mean after

all...the gov'ment is just here to help...not make an evil profit or

" gasp " be efficient.

My opinion: It doesn't matter how the system is constructed or who

provides 911 services...if there is no oversight, no performance

measures, and no concern as to the feelings and expectations of our

customers, then the system will be horrible...no matter who owns it.

Dudley

Re: Re: Baystar medic arrested at scene in La

Porte

Then the people in Harlingen need to get on their government to hold

STEC's feet to the fire and put in better compliance measures for the

911 side of the fence.

This is why 911 services should be governmental, and should have

strict requirements on the provision of 911 vs transfer calls.

Mike

> Yeah you're right but it would not bring immediate

> results. It would probably take an act of God to

> remove these services. Here in Harlingen STEC does

> all transfers within city limits. No one can do a

> transfer initiating in Harlingen (residence). This in

> turn is hurting their 911 response. Anyway, I have

> come across alot of people not satisfied with the

> current service provided, not just in Harlingen, but

> in Laredo, Mc, Mission, etc. There is only one

> TDSHS rep covering from Willacy County to Laredo.

> That's over 100 services. So what's wrong with that

> picture?

> Salvador Capuchino Jr

> EMT-Paramedic

>

> --- Mike wrote:

>

> > On 12/30/05, salvador capuchino

> > wrote:

> > > 4. As a taxpayer I should be able to call who I

> > want

> > > when I want, if I am not happy with the service

> > > provided with the city.

> >

> > No you shouldn't. As a taxpayer, you should demand

> > better and get the

> > service you're paying for. What we DON'T need is a

> > " come-calling "

> > service, where whoever gets called comes. 911

> > service needs to be

> > provided in a controlled manner.

> >

> > Mike :/

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

[Guest guest]

Been watching this one for a while...seems we might be talking about

semantics here...not aware of the definition for negligence saying you

had to receive a 911 call...I believe the plaintiff had to prove you

had a " duty to act " and that seems easy to prove if someone calls

(phone, cell phone, smoke signals,etc) and you say " I'll be there " .

Maybe it was the electrician and he didn't show up and the house went

up in flames killing 2 kids...he didn't have a 911 call but can he be

sued for negligence? This one is above me...Wes??? Dearly departed

Gene???

Dudley

Re: Baystar medic arrested at scene in La Porte

P.S. The way it was explained to me by the regional director for

DSHS

South was that if you received a call for an emergent call, and you

had a unit available, you had a duty to act even if you are a private

for proffit, and don't run regular 911. The only exception to the

rule is if you find another service to run the call for you

in " reasonable " time. It's one of those things that depending on who

you talk to, you get a different story.

Later and god night,

CB

[Guest guest]

Been watching this one for a while...seems we might be talking about

semantics here...not aware of the definition for negligence saying you

had to receive a 911 call...I believe the plaintiff had to prove you

had a " duty to act " and that seems easy to prove if someone calls

(phone, cell phone, smoke signals,etc) and you say " I'll be there " .

Maybe it was the electrician and he didn't show up and the house went

up in flames killing 2 kids...he didn't have a 911 call but can he be

sued for negligence? This one is above me...Wes??? Dearly departed

Gene???

Dudley

Re: Baystar medic arrested at scene in La Porte

P.S. The way it was explained to me by the regional director for

DSHS

South was that if you received a call for an emergent call, and you

had a unit available, you had a duty to act even if you are a private

for proffit, and don't run regular 911. The only exception to the

rule is if you find another service to run the call for you

in " reasonable " time. It's one of those things that depending on who

you talk to, you get a different story.

Later and god night,

CB

[Guest guest]

> Mike,

>

> Sorry...but you left the door open on this one. " This is why 911

> services should be governmental " ...so all these municipal 911 agencies

> are doing things perfect across the state and all municipal 911 are

> superior to private performance contracted 911 agencies because as the

> government...they never have any level of service issues, customer

> complaints, or performance problems...

EMS Operations run by units of government are directly responsible to

the people they serve.

EMS Operations run by private corporations are responsible to their

respective boards of directors and/or stockholders, where applicable,

and not to the people being served.

It's about focus, not about who does what right where. Gene is right

that until people demand more from EMS, they'll continue to get less

and less.

Mike

[Guest guest]

Mike,

Unfortunately you hit the nail on the head with that

one. The sad and unfortunate thing is that the private

services are doing their best to provide superior care

at the street level and being governed by BODs and

stockholders that have no clue as to what is going on

out there. It is difficult, if not impossible to

improve a service when the people who are involved in

the critical decision making have no idea what their

responsibilities are to the 911 recipients nor the 911

providers. Being an eternal optimist, I continue to

try to improve things in our neck of the woods, but

sometimes feel like I'm fighting an up-hill battle all

the way!!!

Belinda

--- Mike wrote:

> On 1/1/06, THEDUDMAN@...

> wrote:

> > Mike,

> >

> > Sorry...but you left the door open on this one.

> " This is why 911

> > services should be governmental " ...so all these

> municipal 911 agencies

> > are doing things perfect across the state and all

> municipal 911 are

> > superior to private performance contracted 911

> agencies because as the

> > government...they never have any level of service

> issues, customer

> > complaints, or performance problems...

>

> EMS Operations run by units of government are

> directly responsible to

> the people they serve.

>

> EMS Operations run by private corporations are

> responsible to their

> respective boards of directors and/or stockholders,

> where applicable,

> and not to the people being served.

>

> It's about focus, not about who does what right

> where. Gene is right

> that until people demand more from EMS, they'll

> continue to get less

> and less.

>

> Mike

>

>

>

>

Belinda Hyer Thacker EMT-P AAS

Lake EMS, Inc.

#5 Oak Dr.

Lake , Tx 77566

Clinical Coordinator

Brazosport College

(979)415-2715 work

(979)481-0318 cell

[Guest guest]

Mike,

Unfortunately you hit the nail on the head with that

one. The sad and unfortunate thing is that the private

services are doing their best to provide superior care

at the street level and being governed by BODs and

stockholders that have no clue as to what is going on

out there. It is difficult, if not impossible to

improve a service when the people who are involved in

the critical decision making have no idea what their

responsibilities are to the 911 recipients nor the 911

providers. Being an eternal optimist, I continue to

try to improve things in our neck of the woods, but

sometimes feel like I'm fighting an up-hill battle all

the way!!!

Belinda

--- Mike wrote:

> On 1/1/06, THEDUDMAN@...

> wrote:

> > Mike,

> >

> > Sorry...but you left the door open on this one.

> " This is why 911

> > services should be governmental " ...so all these

> municipal 911 agencies

> > are doing things perfect across the state and all

> municipal 911 are

> > superior to private performance contracted 911

> agencies because as the

> > government...they never have any level of service

> issues, customer

> > complaints, or performance problems...

>

> EMS Operations run by units of government are

> directly responsible to

> the people they serve.

>

> EMS Operations run by private corporations are

> responsible to their

> respective boards of directors and/or stockholders,

> where applicable,

> and not to the people being served.

>

> It's about focus, not about who does what right

> where. Gene is right

> that until people demand more from EMS, they'll

> continue to get less

> and less.

>

> Mike

>

>

>

>

Belinda Hyer Thacker EMT-P AAS

Lake EMS, Inc.

#5 Oak Dr.

Lake , Tx 77566

Clinical Coordinator

Brazosport College

(979)415-2715 work

(979)481-0318 cell

[Guest guest]

Mike,

Unfortunately you hit the nail on the head with that

one. The sad and unfortunate thing is that the private

services are doing their best to provide superior care

at the street level and being governed by BODs and

stockholders that have no clue as to what is going on

out there. It is difficult, if not impossible to

improve a service when the people who are involved in

the critical decision making have no idea what their

responsibilities are to the 911 recipients nor the 911

providers. Being an eternal optimist, I continue to

try to improve things in our neck of the woods, but

sometimes feel like I'm fighting an up-hill battle all

the way!!!

Belinda

--- Mike wrote:

> On 1/1/06, THEDUDMAN@...

> wrote:

> > Mike,

> >

> > Sorry...but you left the door open on this one.

> " This is why 911

> > services should be governmental " ...so all these

> municipal 911 agencies

> > are doing things perfect across the state and all

> municipal 911 are

> > superior to private performance contracted 911

> agencies because as the

> > government...they never have any level of service

> issues, customer

> > complaints, or performance problems...

>

> EMS Operations run by units of government are

> directly responsible to

> the people they serve.

>

> EMS Operations run by private corporations are

> responsible to their

> respective boards of directors and/or stockholders,

> where applicable,

> and not to the people being served.

>

> It's about focus, not about who does what right

> where. Gene is right

> that until people demand more from EMS, they'll

> continue to get less

> and less.

>

> Mike

>

>

>

>

Belinda Hyer Thacker EMT-P AAS

Lake EMS, Inc.

#5 Oak Dr.

Lake , Tx 77566

Clinical Coordinator

Brazosport College

(979)415-2715 work

(979)481-0318 cell

[Guest guest]

Mike <paramedicop@g...> wrote:

>

> EMS Operations run by units of government are directly responsible to

> the people they serve.

>

> EMS Operations run by private corporations are responsible to their

> respective boards of directors and/or stockholders, where applicable,

> and not to the people being served.

What I can't figure out is exactly why this automatically dooms a

private service to mediocrity... or worse. Where are they going

wrong? For a comparison, look at the hospitals. Why do we all want

to go to the private hospital if we are ill instead of the county

hospital? Why does the private hospital pay and treat their employees

better than the county hospital? Obviously, even with stockholders

and BOD's to satisfy, they find a way to keep quality at the top of

their priorities. Why isn't this happening in EMS?

And of course I have to agree with Dudley that there are plenty of

examples out there of horrible public EMS services and quality private

services. While I would certainly not hold MedStar up as an example

of great quality, I would sure rather be treated by a medic in Fort

Worth than one in Dallas, as would most people in the know.

Rob

[Guest guest]

Mike <paramedicop@g...> wrote:

>

> EMS Operations run by units of government are directly responsible to

> the people they serve.

>

> EMS Operations run by private corporations are responsible to their

> respective boards of directors and/or stockholders, where applicable,

> and not to the people being served.

What I can't figure out is exactly why this automatically dooms a

private service to mediocrity... or worse. Where are they going

wrong? For a comparison, look at the hospitals. Why do we all want

to go to the private hospital if we are ill instead of the county

hospital? Why does the private hospital pay and treat their employees

better than the county hospital? Obviously, even with stockholders

and BOD's to satisfy, they find a way to keep quality at the top of

their priorities. Why isn't this happening in EMS?

And of course I have to agree with Dudley that there are plenty of

examples out there of horrible public EMS services and quality private

services. While I would certainly not hold MedStar up as an example

of great quality, I would sure rather be treated by a medic in Fort

Worth than one in Dallas, as would most people in the know.

Rob

[Guest guest]

If we are going to continue this debate ad nauseum, can we at least

change the cubject line?

> >

> > EMS Operations run by units of government are directly

responsible to

> > the people they serve.

> >

> > EMS Operations run by private corporations are responsible to

their

> > respective boards of directors and/or stockholders, where

applicable,

> > and not to the people being served.

>

> What I can't figure out is exactly why this automatically dooms a

> private service to mediocrity... or worse. Where are they going

> wrong? For a comparison, look at the hospitals. Why do we all

want

> to go to the private hospital if we are ill instead of the county

> hospital? Why does the private hospital pay and treat their

employees

> better than the county hospital? Obviously, even with

stockholders

> and BOD's to satisfy, they find a way to keep quality at the top

of

> their priorities. Why isn't this happening in EMS?

>

> And of course I have to agree with Dudley that there are plenty of

> examples out there of horrible public EMS services and quality

private

> services. While I would certainly not hold MedStar up as an

example

> of great quality, I would sure rather be treated by a medic in

Fort

> Worth than one in Dallas, as would most people in the know.

>

> Rob

>

[Guest guest]

If we are going to continue this debate ad nauseum, can we at least

change the subject line?

>

> Been watching this one for a while...seems we might be talking

about

> semantics here...not aware of the definition for negligence saying

you

> had to receive a 911 call...I believe the plaintiff had to prove

you

> had a " duty to act " and that seems easy to prove if someone calls

> (phone, cell phone, smoke signals,etc) and you say " I'll be

there " .

>

> Maybe it was the electrician and he didn't show up and the house

went

> up in flames killing 2 kids...he didn't have a 911 call but can he

be

> sued for negligence? This one is above me...Wes??? Dearly

departed

> Gene???

>

> Dudley

>

> Re: Baystar medic arrested at scene in La

Porte

>

> P.S. The way it was explained to me by the regional director

for

> DSHS

> South was that if you received a call for an emergent call, and you

> had a unit available, you had a duty to act even if you are a

private

> for proffit, and don't run regular 911. The only exception to the

> rule is if you find another service to run the call for you

> in " reasonable " time. It's one of those things that depending on

who

> you talk to, you get a different story.

>

> Later and god night,

>

> CB

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

If we are going to continue this debate ad nauseum, can we at least

change the subject line?

>

> Been watching this one for a while...seems we might be talking

about

> semantics here...not aware of the definition for negligence saying

you

> had to receive a 911 call...I believe the plaintiff had to prove

you

> had a " duty to act " and that seems easy to prove if someone calls

> (phone, cell phone, smoke signals,etc) and you say " I'll be

there " .

>

> Maybe it was the electrician and he didn't show up and the house

went

> up in flames killing 2 kids...he didn't have a 911 call but can he

be

> sued for negligence? This one is above me...Wes??? Dearly

departed

> Gene???

>

> Dudley

>

> Re: Baystar medic arrested at scene in La

Porte

>

> P.S. The way it was explained to me by the regional director

for

> DSHS

> South was that if you received a call for an emergent call, and you

> had a unit available, you had a duty to act even if you are a

private

> for proffit, and don't run regular 911. The only exception to the

> rule is if you find another service to run the call for you

> in " reasonable " time. It's one of those things that depending on

who

> you talk to, you get a different story.

>

> Later and god night,

>

> CB

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

If we are going to continue this debate ad nauseum, can we at least

change the subject line?

>

> Been watching this one for a while...seems we might be talking

about

> semantics here...not aware of the definition for negligence saying

you

> had to receive a 911 call...I believe the plaintiff had to prove

you

> had a " duty to act " and that seems easy to prove if someone calls

> (phone, cell phone, smoke signals,etc) and you say " I'll be

there " .

>

> Maybe it was the electrician and he didn't show up and the house

went

> up in flames killing 2 kids...he didn't have a 911 call but can he

be

> sued for negligence? This one is above me...Wes??? Dearly

departed

> Gene???

>

> Dudley

>

> Re: Baystar medic arrested at scene in La

Porte

>

> P.S. The way it was explained to me by the regional director

for

> DSHS

> South was that if you received a call for an emergent call, and you

> had a unit available, you had a duty to act even if you are a

private

> for proffit, and don't run regular 911. The only exception to the

> rule is if you find another service to run the call for you

> in " reasonable " time. It's one of those things that depending on

who

> you talk to, you get a different story.

>

> Later and god night,

>

> CB

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>