One more thing on the national scope

[Guest guest]

I'm still curious legally how this fits into the structure that we have here

in Texas. As we all (should) know, the physician, by signing the protocols,

is in effect delegating parts of his medical practice to perform, whether we

are ECAs or Licensed Paramedics with the full range of alphabet soup acronyms.

As I understand it, Texas is one of the few states with such an

arrangement. How will the national scope of practice address this issue? In the

past,

there have been lawsuits filed against HMOs for the unlicensed practice of

medicine when they have mandated to physicians which procedures can and cannot

be

performed. Without meaning to provide a specific legal opinion, the parallel

seems striking. I wonder what legal liability Greg Margolis et al will have

for limiting which skills a physician may delegate? I can assure you that

there will be a lawsuit when a provider can no longer interventions that he/she

could have provided before the national scope took effect.

-Wes Ogilvie, MPA, JD, EMT

[Guest guest]

this is one part of the discussion on this topc that i don't understand why

everybody is arguing about. the proposed SOP's says it in black and white, Intro

page IV under SKills by Level lines 9-11, if the physician whats to add or

subtract to the SOP's, they can do it. there again, if the EMSD says the EMR can

RSI, Hooooo Raaah, he gets to RSI. so what's the problem?

One more thing on the national scope

I'm still curious legally how this fits into the structure that we have here

in Texas. As we all (should) know, the physician, by signing the protocols,

is in effect delegating parts of his medical practice to perform, whether we

are ECAs or Licensed Paramedics with the full range of alphabet soup

acronyms.

As I understand it, Texas is one of the few states with such an

arrangement. How will the national scope of practice address this issue? In

the past,

there have been lawsuits filed against HMOs for the unlicensed practice of

medicine when they have mandated to physicians which procedures can and

cannot be

performed. Without meaning to provide a specific legal opinion, the parallel

seems striking. I wonder what legal liability Greg Margolis et al will have

for limiting which skills a physician may delegate? I can assure you that

there will be a lawsuit when a provider can no longer interventions that

he/she

could have provided before the national scope took effect.

-Wes Ogilvie, MPA, JD, EMT

[Guest guest]

this is one part of the discussion on this topc that i don't understand why

everybody is arguing about. the proposed SOP's says it in black and white, Intro

page IV under SKills by Level lines 9-11, if the physician whats to add or

subtract to the SOP's, they can do it. there again, if the EMSD says the EMR can

RSI, Hooooo Raaah, he gets to RSI. so what's the problem?

One more thing on the national scope

I'm still curious legally how this fits into the structure that we have here

in Texas. As we all (should) know, the physician, by signing the protocols,

is in effect delegating parts of his medical practice to perform, whether we

are ECAs or Licensed Paramedics with the full range of alphabet soup

acronyms.

As I understand it, Texas is one of the few states with such an

arrangement. How will the national scope of practice address this issue? In

the past,

there have been lawsuits filed against HMOs for the unlicensed practice of

medicine when they have mandated to physicians which procedures can and

cannot be

performed. Without meaning to provide a specific legal opinion, the parallel

seems striking. I wonder what legal liability Greg Margolis et al will have

for limiting which skills a physician may delegate? I can assure you that

there will be a lawsuit when a provider can no longer interventions that

he/she

could have provided before the national scope took effect.

-Wes Ogilvie, MPA, JD, EMT

[Guest guest]

Mr. Hatfield,

That's my interpretation as well.

-aro

>

>

> From: Jonathon's Mail [mailto:goldstar517@c...]

>

> >>if the EMSD says the EMR can RSI, Hooooo Raaah, he gets to RSI. so

what's

> the problem?

>

>

> Actually, my interpretation is different. What it says is that just

because

> a skill is listed under your level, doesn't mean your EMSD is

required to

> allow you to do it according to his/her protocols. However, if a

skill is

> *prohibited* at your level, your EMSD is not able to delegate it.

>

>

> In short, " The EMSD can taketh away, but the EMSD cannot giveth. " ...

>

>

> Mike