Guest guest Report post Posted September 17, 2004 Just makes me think of all the times I've arrived on scene to find a conscious and alert patient, with a friend/relative on location telling me that they had to do " C-P-aura " on the patient before we arrived. Yet with just a little questioning, we learn that the patient was never in arrest-- in fact, many times they weren't even unconscious! (Yes--I know it's " CPR " but EVERY TIME I've had this experience, the person has pronounced the " R " as " aura " .) Thank God for the built-in safeguards on the AEDs! Maxine hire-Pattison EMS ---- Original message ---- >Date: Fri, 17 Sep 2004 13:39:16 -0000 > > > Well I saw in the paper that the AED's are availble > to anyone without > a prescription. Hope ya'll are ready!!! > Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted September 17, 2004 Just makes me think of all the times I've arrived on scene to find a conscious and alert patient, with a friend/relative on location telling me that they had to do " C-P-aura " on the patient before we arrived. Yet with just a little questioning, we learn that the patient was never in arrest-- in fact, many times they weren't even unconscious! (Yes--I know it's " CPR " but EVERY TIME I've had this experience, the person has pronounced the " R " as " aura " .) Thank God for the built-in safeguards on the AEDs! Maxine hire-Pattison EMS ---- Original message ---- >Date: Fri, 17 Sep 2004 13:39:16 -0000 > > > Well I saw in the paper that the AED's are availble > to anyone without > a prescription. Hope ya'll are ready!!! > Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted September 17, 2004 Just makes me think of all the times I've arrived on scene to find a conscious and alert patient, with a friend/relative on location telling me that they had to do " C-P-aura " on the patient before we arrived. Yet with just a little questioning, we learn that the patient was never in arrest-- in fact, many times they weren't even unconscious! (Yes--I know it's " CPR " but EVERY TIME I've had this experience, the person has pronounced the " R " as " aura " .) Thank God for the built-in safeguards on the AEDs! Maxine hire-Pattison EMS ---- Original message ---- >Date: Fri, 17 Sep 2004 13:39:16 -0000 > > > Well I saw in the paper that the AED's are availble > to anyone without > a prescription. Hope ya'll are ready!!! > Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted September 17, 2004 Two things they worry about paying when they need it but not latter, when you hear the term don't worry about yo monies just takes em to da hozzpisstitle, you know you will never receive payment for that trip. Which goes with are not none oh me that be hurrss. Re: AED " Red " <fire@f...> wrote: > > I can just imagine the thoughts going through one's head. " Don't call the > ambulance, we have the same thing they use, and it's already paid for. I > ain't gonna pay for some ambulance to come out and do what I'm going to do > here. " Hold it... you're suggesting that some citizens might worry about having to pay their ambulance bill? Can't say I have ever encountered that in 30 years. Rob Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted September 17, 2004 Two things they worry about paying when they need it but not latter, when you hear the term don't worry about yo monies just takes em to da hozzpisstitle, you know you will never receive payment for that trip. Which goes with are not none oh me that be hurrss. Re: AED " Red " <fire@f...> wrote: > > I can just imagine the thoughts going through one's head. " Don't call the > ambulance, we have the same thing they use, and it's already paid for. I > ain't gonna pay for some ambulance to come out and do what I'm going to do > here. " Hold it... you're suggesting that some citizens might worry about having to pay their ambulance bill? Can't say I have ever encountered that in 30 years. Rob Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted September 17, 2004 Two things they worry about paying when they need it but not latter, when you hear the term don't worry about yo monies just takes em to da hozzpisstitle, you know you will never receive payment for that trip. Which goes with are not none oh me that be hurrss. Re: AED " Red " <fire@f...> wrote: > > I can just imagine the thoughts going through one's head. " Don't call the > ambulance, we have the same thing they use, and it's already paid for. I > ain't gonna pay for some ambulance to come out and do what I'm going to do > here. " Hold it... you're suggesting that some citizens might worry about having to pay their ambulance bill? Can't say I have ever encountered that in 30 years. Rob Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted September 17, 2004 Red, I can agree with the training part. But that's hard to enforce. Already, the state has a law that states that a physician has to oversee the acquisition and training for an AED. But it's rarely done. All this change allows is purchase without a prescription, and that now conflicts with state law. =Steve= Red wrote: >There are many documented cases where fires have started and occupants or >employees of the structure delayed notifying the FD because they tried, for >up to 20mins, to extinguish the fire themselves, with fire extinguishers > >This is not a question of " IF " , but " WHEN " . > >When people have these new fancy tools(occupant use stand pipes, fire >extinguishers, AEDs etc.), they gain a false sense of security, that they >can control the situation. > >I can just imagine the thoughts going through one's head. " Don't call the >ambulance, we have the same thing they use, and it's already paid for. I >ain't gonna pay for some ambulance to come out and do what I'm going to do >here. " > >So yes, I agree with you on that there NEEDS to be training that accompanies >AEDs, I don't think they should be OTC. It should be a requirement to have >CPR/AED certification to purchase them. > > >Red > AED > > > > >>Don't get me wrong i'm all for the AED's availble for anyone, as long >>as we can tighten the reigns on the training NEEDED for them. There >>are a few scenarios people throw out that to me are foolish. Overall >>AED's save more people than before we had them. Just because you >>have a smoke detector doesn't mean you won't call the FD when you >>have a fire. >> >> Lee >> >> >> >> >> >> Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted September 17, 2004 Red, I can agree with the training part. But that's hard to enforce. Already, the state has a law that states that a physician has to oversee the acquisition and training for an AED. But it's rarely done. All this change allows is purchase without a prescription, and that now conflicts with state law. =Steve= Red wrote: >There are many documented cases where fires have started and occupants or >employees of the structure delayed notifying the FD because they tried, for >up to 20mins, to extinguish the fire themselves, with fire extinguishers > >This is not a question of " IF " , but " WHEN " . > >When people have these new fancy tools(occupant use stand pipes, fire >extinguishers, AEDs etc.), they gain a false sense of security, that they >can control the situation. > >I can just imagine the thoughts going through one's head. " Don't call the >ambulance, we have the same thing they use, and it's already paid for. I >ain't gonna pay for some ambulance to come out and do what I'm going to do >here. " > >So yes, I agree with you on that there NEEDS to be training that accompanies >AEDs, I don't think they should be OTC. It should be a requirement to have >CPR/AED certification to purchase them. > > >Red > AED > > > > >>Don't get me wrong i'm all for the AED's availble for anyone, as long >>as we can tighten the reigns on the training NEEDED for them. There >>are a few scenarios people throw out that to me are foolish. Overall >>AED's save more people than before we had them. Just because you >>have a smoke detector doesn't mean you won't call the FD when you >>have a fire. >> >> Lee >> >> >> >> >> >> Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted September 17, 2004 Red, I can agree with the training part. But that's hard to enforce. Already, the state has a law that states that a physician has to oversee the acquisition and training for an AED. But it's rarely done. All this change allows is purchase without a prescription, and that now conflicts with state law. =Steve= Red wrote: >There are many documented cases where fires have started and occupants or >employees of the structure delayed notifying the FD because they tried, for >up to 20mins, to extinguish the fire themselves, with fire extinguishers > >This is not a question of " IF " , but " WHEN " . > >When people have these new fancy tools(occupant use stand pipes, fire >extinguishers, AEDs etc.), they gain a false sense of security, that they >can control the situation. > >I can just imagine the thoughts going through one's head. " Don't call the >ambulance, we have the same thing they use, and it's already paid for. I >ain't gonna pay for some ambulance to come out and do what I'm going to do >here. " > >So yes, I agree with you on that there NEEDS to be training that accompanies >AEDs, I don't think they should be OTC. It should be a requirement to have >CPR/AED certification to purchase them. > > >Red > AED > > > > >>Don't get me wrong i'm all for the AED's availble for anyone, as long >>as we can tighten the reigns on the training NEEDED for them. There >>are a few scenarios people throw out that to me are foolish. Overall >>AED's save more people than before we had them. Just because you >>have a smoke detector doesn't mean you won't call the FD when you >>have a fire. >> >> Lee >> >> >> >> >> >> Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted September 17, 2004 enforcement is always a problem, with any law. It should be there though(the laws), especially for CYA. AED >> >> >> >> >>>Don't get me wrong i'm all for the AED's availble for anyone, as long >>>as we can tighten the reigns on the training NEEDED for them. There >>>are a few scenarios people throw out that to me are foolish. Overall >>>AED's save more people than before we had them. Just because you >>>have a smoke detector doesn't mean you won't call the FD when you >>>have a fire. >>> >>> Lee >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted September 17, 2004 On Fri, 17 Sep 2004 15:30:04 -0500, Red wrote: > > enforcement is always a problem, with any law. It should be there though(the > laws), especially for CYA. Laws should never exist solely for CYA. Either they should be enforced or repealed. Mike Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted September 17, 2004 On Fri, 17 Sep 2004 15:30:04 -0500, Red wrote: > > enforcement is always a problem, with any law. It should be there though(the > laws), especially for CYA. Laws should never exist solely for CYA. Either they should be enforced or repealed. Mike Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted September 17, 2004 On Fri, 17 Sep 2004 15:30:04 -0500, Red wrote: > > enforcement is always a problem, with any law. It should be there though(the > laws), especially for CYA. Laws should never exist solely for CYA. Either they should be enforced or repealed. Mike Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted September 17, 2004 So you don't agree with the good Samaritan law? and self defense defense? Re: AED > On Fri, 17 Sep 2004 15:30:04 -0500, Red > wrote: >> >> enforcement is always a problem, with any law. It should be there >> though(the >> laws), especially for CYA. > > Laws should never exist solely for CYA. Either they should be > enforced or repealed. > > Mike > > > > > Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted September 17, 2004 So you don't agree with the good Samaritan law? and self defense defense? Re: AED > On Fri, 17 Sep 2004 15:30:04 -0500, Red > wrote: >> >> enforcement is always a problem, with any law. It should be there >> though(the >> laws), especially for CYA. > > Laws should never exist solely for CYA. Either they should be > enforced or repealed. > > Mike > > > > > Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted September 17, 2004 So you don't agree with the good Samaritan law? and self defense defense? Re: AED > On Fri, 17 Sep 2004 15:30:04 -0500, Red > wrote: >> >> enforcement is always a problem, with any law. It should be there >> though(the >> laws), especially for CYA. > > Laws should never exist solely for CYA. Either they should be > enforced or repealed. > > Mike > > > > > Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted September 17, 2004 If I ever need an aed I will shock my self and then call 911 is another problem we deal with. ======================================== AED > > > > >>Don't get me wrong i'm all for the AED's availble for anyone, as long >>as we can tighten the reigns on the training NEEDED for them. There >>are a few scenarios people throw out that to me are foolish. Overall >>AED's save more people than before we had them. Just because you >>have a smoke detector doesn't mean you won't call the FD when you >>have a fire. >> >> Lee >> >> >> >> >> >> Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted September 17, 2004 If I ever need an aed I will shock my self and then call 911 is another problem we deal with. ======================================== AED > > > > >>Don't get me wrong i'm all for the AED's availble for anyone, as long >>as we can tighten the reigns on the training NEEDED for them. There >>are a few scenarios people throw out that to me are foolish. Overall >>AED's save more people than before we had them. Just because you >>have a smoke detector doesn't mean you won't call the FD when you >>have a fire. >> >> Lee >> >> >> >> >> >> Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted September 17, 2004 If I ever need an aed I will shock my self and then call 911 is another problem we deal with. ======================================== AED > > > > >>Don't get me wrong i'm all for the AED's availble for anyone, as long >>as we can tighten the reigns on the training NEEDED for them. There >>are a few scenarios people throw out that to me are foolish. Overall >>AED's save more people than before we had them. Just because you >>have a smoke detector doesn't mean you won't call the FD when you >>have a fire. >> >> Lee >> >> >> >> >> >> Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted September 20, 2004 Those aren't laws in the same sense that we're talking about here - they're crafted excpetions to existing laws. The " Good Samaritan " law is a crafted exception to various civil laws that are routinely " enforced " by civil courts, and the self-defense defense is a crafted exception to the Penal Code. When dealing with " CYA " laws, you either have to decide that the law needs a crafted exception and you enforce the rest of it, or that you should simply repeal (or not pass) the law to begin with. Mike On Fri, 17 Sep 2004 17:09:52 -0500, Red wrote: > So you don't agree with the good Samaritan law? and self defense defense? > > > Re: AED > > > On Fri, 17 Sep 2004 15:30:04 -0500, Red > > wrote: > >> > >> enforcement is always a problem, with any law. It should be there > >> though(the > >> laws), especially for CYA. > > > > Laws should never exist solely for CYA. Either they should be > > enforced or repealed. > > > > Mike > > > > > > > > > > > > Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted September 20, 2004 Those aren't laws in the same sense that we're talking about here - they're crafted excpetions to existing laws. The " Good Samaritan " law is a crafted exception to various civil laws that are routinely " enforced " by civil courts, and the self-defense defense is a crafted exception to the Penal Code. When dealing with " CYA " laws, you either have to decide that the law needs a crafted exception and you enforce the rest of it, or that you should simply repeal (or not pass) the law to begin with. Mike On Fri, 17 Sep 2004 17:09:52 -0500, Red wrote: > So you don't agree with the good Samaritan law? and self defense defense? > > > Re: AED > > > On Fri, 17 Sep 2004 15:30:04 -0500, Red > > wrote: > >> > >> enforcement is always a problem, with any law. It should be there > >> though(the > >> laws), especially for CYA. > > > > Laws should never exist solely for CYA. Either they should be > > enforced or repealed. > > > > Mike > > > > > > > > > > > > Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted September 20, 2004 Those aren't laws in the same sense that we're talking about here - they're crafted excpetions to existing laws. The " Good Samaritan " law is a crafted exception to various civil laws that are routinely " enforced " by civil courts, and the self-defense defense is a crafted exception to the Penal Code. When dealing with " CYA " laws, you either have to decide that the law needs a crafted exception and you enforce the rest of it, or that you should simply repeal (or not pass) the law to begin with. Mike On Fri, 17 Sep 2004 17:09:52 -0500, Red wrote: > So you don't agree with the good Samaritan law? and self defense defense? > > > Re: AED > > > On Fri, 17 Sep 2004 15:30:04 -0500, Red > > wrote: > >> > >> enforcement is always a problem, with any law. It should be there > >> though(the > >> laws), especially for CYA. > > > > Laws should never exist solely for CYA. Either they should be > > enforced or repealed. > > > > Mike > > > > > > > > > > > > Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted September 20, 2004 I have to jump in here to try to clarify what's being said. The " Good Sam " laws are not " enforced. " They are applied through the civil legal process. The GSL law is only used when somebody gets sued for negligence. Then that person has the option of pleading the GSL as a defense. It is called an " affirmative defense " and it does not automatically act to do anything. What happens is that the defendant, in his responsive pleading to the Petition or Complaint that has been filed against him, state in one of the paragraphs that: " Defendent denies that his is liable to Plaintiffs and hereby invokes the provisions of Section xxx, Negligence Code of the State of EMS Utopia, which defendent asserts fully protects him from being found negligent and liable to Plaintiff. " Or words to that effect. At that point, the defense acts to force the Plaintiff to prove that the GSL doesn't protect the defendant. This basically turns the tables on the Plaintiff, since normally all he needs to do is prove negligence. Now he not only needs to prove negligence, that that the negligence was of the magnitude that overrides the protections afforded by the GSL. Generally, this requires that the Plaintiff prove gross negligence, reckless conduct, or wilful and wanton behavior (roughly all the same thing) in order to overcome the limited immunity of the GSL. So the GSL is really a grant of limited immunity, but it must be asserted (pleaded) by the Defendant, and then the immunity is available to him unless and until the Plaintiff overcomes that limited immunity by proving a higher degree of negligence. Clear as mud? Gene In a message dated 9/20/2004 9:18:26 AM Central Daylight Time, paramedicop@... writes: Those aren't laws in the same sense that we're talking about here - they're crafted excpetions to existing laws. The " Good Samaritan " law is a crafted exception to various civil laws that are routinely " enforced " by civil courts, and the self-defense defense is a crafted exception to the Penal Code. When dealing with " CYA " laws, you either have to decide that the law needs a crafted exception and you enforce the rest of it, or that you should simply repeal (or not pass) the law to begin with. Mike On Fri, 17 Sep 2004 17:09:52 -0500, Red wrote: > So you don't agree with the good Samaritan law? and self defense defense? > > > Re: AED > > > On Fri, 17 Sep 2004 15:30:04 -0500, Red > > wrote: > >> > >> enforcement is always a problem, with any law. It should be there > >> though(the > >> laws), especially for CYA. > > > > Laws should never exist solely for CYA. Either they should be > > enforced or repealed. > > > > Mike > > > > > > > > > > > > Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted September 20, 2004 I have to jump in here to try to clarify what's being said. The " Good Sam " laws are not " enforced. " They are applied through the civil legal process. The GSL law is only used when somebody gets sued for negligence. Then that person has the option of pleading the GSL as a defense. It is called an " affirmative defense " and it does not automatically act to do anything. What happens is that the defendant, in his responsive pleading to the Petition or Complaint that has been filed against him, state in one of the paragraphs that: " Defendent denies that his is liable to Plaintiffs and hereby invokes the provisions of Section xxx, Negligence Code of the State of EMS Utopia, which defendent asserts fully protects him from being found negligent and liable to Plaintiff. " Or words to that effect. At that point, the defense acts to force the Plaintiff to prove that the GSL doesn't protect the defendant. This basically turns the tables on the Plaintiff, since normally all he needs to do is prove negligence. Now he not only needs to prove negligence, that that the negligence was of the magnitude that overrides the protections afforded by the GSL. Generally, this requires that the Plaintiff prove gross negligence, reckless conduct, or wilful and wanton behavior (roughly all the same thing) in order to overcome the limited immunity of the GSL. So the GSL is really a grant of limited immunity, but it must be asserted (pleaded) by the Defendant, and then the immunity is available to him unless and until the Plaintiff overcomes that limited immunity by proving a higher degree of negligence. Clear as mud? Gene In a message dated 9/20/2004 9:18:26 AM Central Daylight Time, paramedicop@... writes: Those aren't laws in the same sense that we're talking about here - they're crafted excpetions to existing laws. The " Good Samaritan " law is a crafted exception to various civil laws that are routinely " enforced " by civil courts, and the self-defense defense is a crafted exception to the Penal Code. When dealing with " CYA " laws, you either have to decide that the law needs a crafted exception and you enforce the rest of it, or that you should simply repeal (or not pass) the law to begin with. Mike On Fri, 17 Sep 2004 17:09:52 -0500, Red wrote: > So you don't agree with the good Samaritan law? and self defense defense? > > > Re: AED > > > On Fri, 17 Sep 2004 15:30:04 -0500, Red > > wrote: > >> > >> enforcement is always a problem, with any law. It should be there > >> though(the > >> laws), especially for CYA. > > > > Laws should never exist solely for CYA. Either they should be > > enforced or repealed. > > > > Mike > > > > > > > > > > > > Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted September 20, 2004 I have to jump in here to try to clarify what's being said. The " Good Sam " laws are not " enforced. " They are applied through the civil legal process. The GSL law is only used when somebody gets sued for negligence. Then that person has the option of pleading the GSL as a defense. It is called an " affirmative defense " and it does not automatically act to do anything. What happens is that the defendant, in his responsive pleading to the Petition or Complaint that has been filed against him, state in one of the paragraphs that: " Defendent denies that his is liable to Plaintiffs and hereby invokes the provisions of Section xxx, Negligence Code of the State of EMS Utopia, which defendent asserts fully protects him from being found negligent and liable to Plaintiff. " Or words to that effect. At that point, the defense acts to force the Plaintiff to prove that the GSL doesn't protect the defendant. This basically turns the tables on the Plaintiff, since normally all he needs to do is prove negligence. Now he not only needs to prove negligence, that that the negligence was of the magnitude that overrides the protections afforded by the GSL. Generally, this requires that the Plaintiff prove gross negligence, reckless conduct, or wilful and wanton behavior (roughly all the same thing) in order to overcome the limited immunity of the GSL. So the GSL is really a grant of limited immunity, but it must be asserted (pleaded) by the Defendant, and then the immunity is available to him unless and until the Plaintiff overcomes that limited immunity by proving a higher degree of negligence. Clear as mud? Gene In a message dated 9/20/2004 9:18:26 AM Central Daylight Time, paramedicop@... writes: Those aren't laws in the same sense that we're talking about here - they're crafted excpetions to existing laws. The " Good Samaritan " law is a crafted exception to various civil laws that are routinely " enforced " by civil courts, and the self-defense defense is a crafted exception to the Penal Code. When dealing with " CYA " laws, you either have to decide that the law needs a crafted exception and you enforce the rest of it, or that you should simply repeal (or not pass) the law to begin with. Mike On Fri, 17 Sep 2004 17:09:52 -0500, Red wrote: > So you don't agree with the good Samaritan law? and self defense defense? > > > Re: AED > > > On Fri, 17 Sep 2004 15:30:04 -0500, Red > > wrote: > >> > >> enforcement is always a problem, with any law. It should be there > >> though(the > >> laws), especially for CYA. > > > > Laws should never exist solely for CYA. Either they should be > > enforced or repealed. > > > > Mike > > > > > > > > > > > > Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
