Paramedics refuse to take 2yr old to hospital

[sherri79]

This is so true - it's why the school called me when my son fell even though there was no obvious injury and he hadn't hit his head or anything - all they knew was that he wasn't acting right.

Children's daily caretakers (and especially the parents) know when something is wrong. I'm surprised the ambulance didn't take this child, but I don't know how you could file a lawsuit because there weren't any damages. The child's injury wasn't any worse because of the ambulance not taking him.

i dont care if the parents get money and really see no reason they should get a pay day if they choose to sue. you can sue to force a change in policy and not because u want money and i could get behind the parents if the choose to sue for that reason. nothing went wrong in this case but it could have easily. the break could have separated and taken longer to heal. the break could have pierced the skin and required surgery. the parents could have trusted the EMTs and not taken the boy to the hospital and infection developed. how well did the EMTs check the child? if they missed a broken collar bone could they have missed a head injury or a broken rib? a broken rib could puncture vital organs. a fracture in his neck can happen in a child from a fall even a short distance. when dealing with a child i think you have to trust the parents. they can read their child better than any stranger. i dont think the EMTs should have taken the risk.

 

[southcitymom]

i dont care if the parents get money and really see no reason they should get a pay day if they choose to sue. you can sue to force a change in policy and not because u want money and i could get behind the parents if the choose to sue for that reason. nothing went wrong in this case but it could have easily. the break could have separated and taken longer to heal. the break could have pierced the skin and required surgery. the parents could have trusted the EMTs and not taken the boy to the hospital and infection developed. how well did the EMTs check the child? if they missed a broken collar bone could they have missed a head injury or a broken rib? a broken rib could puncture vital organs. a fracture in his neck can happen in a child from a fall even a short distance. when dealing with a child i think you have to trust the parents. they can read their child better than any stranger. i dont think the EMTs should have taken the risk.

I wonder what requirements the EMTs have. And you are right about suing to effect a policy change - I wasn't thinking about that.

 

[MeoW333]

i dont care if the parents get money and really see no reason they should get a pay day if they choose to sue. you can sue to force a change in policy and not because u want money and i could get behind the parents if the choose to sue for that reason. nothing went wrong in this case but it could have easily. the break could have separated and taken longer to heal. the break could have pierced the skin and required surgery. the parents could have trusted the EMTs and not taken the boy to the hospital and infection developed. how well did the EMTs check the child? if they missed a broken collar bone could they have missed a head injury or a broken rib? a broken rib could puncture vital organs. a fracture in his neck can happen in a child from a fall even a short distance. when dealing with a child i think you have to trust the parents. they can read their child better than any stranger. i dont think the EMTs should have taken the risk.

I agree, it's the principle of the matter, more so than the money from a lawsuit. The EMTs are not doctors', they can't do x-rays in the ambulance. Better safe than sorry. Around here they've never refused to take someone as far as i know.

 

[MagicRose99]

Wow... some harsh judgements here... especially when we've only heard one side of the story here. How do we know these parents aren't lying? How do we know the parents didn't refuse help then claim this? How do we know there isn't more to this story?

I think I'll wait for the other side to come out... then I'll form my judgement.

 

[sherri79]

Wow... some harsh judgements here... especially when we've only heard one side of the story here. How do we know these parents aren't lying? How do we know the parents didn't refuse help then claim this? How do we know there isn't more to this story?

I think I'll wait for the other side to come out... then I'll form my judgement.

just going by what information we have and what seems logical. 911 keeps records so it would be easy to show that the parents called. if the parents called 911 then took their child to the hospital themselves and the child had a injury their story follows a logical chain of events. any time we talk about a news story we run a risk of not having all the information. in this case the parents story is so easy to check up on i doubt it is untrue. why would they feel their child was so hurt that they called 911 then refuse to let them help the child then turn around and drive the child to the hospital themselves then lie?

 

[southcitymom]

... in this case the parents story is so easy to check up on i doubt it is untrue. why would they feel their child was so hurt that they called 911 then refuse to let them help the child then turn around and drive the child to the hospital themselves then lie?

I agree 100%. I think the information we know is pretty valid.

 

[Kymistry35]

If this is their first child, they may have panicked at him getting hurt and called 911. I know I have. When my oldest was small, he was always getting hurt. I am surprised that he can still see, he tripped and fell and a nail went through his eye. The next week he was spinning and fell, hit the metal on a pull out couch and sliced the same eye open. I was only 5 minutes from the ER but I preferred to call an ambulance because I tend to panic in those situations.

 

[Mr. E]

Is it a common thing for people to call for an ambulance? The closest I've ever come is when my then 9-year-old daughter was complaining of chest pain and couldn't get her breath. I called the ER nurse, who told me to bring her in "just to be sure" nothing was wrong. Turns out her heartrate was 228; she had a common heart problem called supraventricular tachycardia. After that there were many trips to the ER when she couldn't get her heartrate under control, but we always took her ourselves. Seems like it would take more time to have the ambulance come all the way to your house, evaluate the situation, then transport. Costly, too, I would imagine.

 

[TheShadow]

My thought was that it might have had something to do with cost. THe EMT's might have told them that if they were uninsured that it could cost several thousand to travel to the ER by ambulance versus the parents driving them. In that case they would have been saving a lot of money for the family. It also happens a lot that when someone else looks at a person, the injury seems to not be there anymore. Man, I can't tell you how many times this has happened with my pets and the vet. Now I'm not really comparing a child to a dog, but sometimes the pain comes and goes, and the child may not have presented with much pain when the EMT's were present.
The only time I called an ambulance was when I literally couldn't move due to back spasms. I felt really bad about it, but I couldn't move, I was in a level of pain that I didn't know existed, and I was scared that something was wrong with my spinal cord, or that I might cause myself permanent damage.

 

[rayray]

I don't know the situation in the area this happened..
But in my area, you have to pay for an ambulance ride.. because our ambulances are privately owned. They do not come from our city. The city pays so much to the company, and then you pick up the tab.
Perhaps the EMTS realized this was not life threatening and saw no reason to take the ambulance?

 

[Spazkat9696]

My thought was that it might have had something to do with cost. THe EMT's might have told them that if they were uninsured that it could cost several thousand to travel to the ER by ambulance versus the parents driving them. In that case they would have been saving a lot of money for the family. It also happens a lot that when someone else looks at a person, the injury seems to not be there anymore. Man, I can't tell you how many times this has happened with my pets and the vet. Now I'm not really comparing a child to a dog, but sometimes the pain comes and goes, and the child may not have presented with much pain when the EMT's were present.
The only time I called an ambulance was when I literally couldn't move due to back spasms. I felt really bad about it, but I couldn't move, I was in a level of pain that I didn't know existed, and I was scared that something was wrong with my spinal cord, or that I might cause myself permanent damage.

You have to pay to ride in an ambulance? They are free here. I had one called for me one day when I was at the bank, asthma attack. My hubby ended up having to come though cause they could not take our son who was 3 at the time because there was no one to watch him. There I am can't breathe and they want me to just leave my son in the care of the bank manager until my hubby gets there yah right. I would have had a heart attack from the stress of leaving him with a stranger on top of the asthma attack I was already having. Lucky for me my hubby speeds and got there before I had to throw my self on the floor.

 

[TheShadow]

If you have good insurance and the situation is appropriate, then the insurance usually covers it. In some areas they definitely charge, and if you are not insured, you will get billed.

 

[BhamMama]

If the EMT's even discussed payment with these people that would be wrong. It is not their job to determine who can pay and who can not.

It is also not their place to determine how badly someone is injured before they can use a public service that either they pay for or their insurance pays for. There could have been internal bleeding or nerve damage that they couldn't see.

I could maybe see if it were abuse of the program...someone calling many, many times because they are hypochondriacs or lonely (it happens!) but for someone whose baby is hurt...not their call to decide.

Their job is to stabilize a person and get them to trained doctors, who can tell if there is something wrong. Not to play doctor themselves.

 

[JBean]

I don't know the situation in the area this happened..
But in my area, you have to pay for an ambulance ride.. because our ambulances are privately owned. They do not come from our city. The city pays so much to the company, and then you pick up the tab.
Perhaps the EMTS realized this was not life threatening and saw no reason to take the ambulance?

we pay here too Rayray. Insurance will usually cover it if one has good insuance.

 

[Spazkat9696]

Our ambulance service is run by the city and it's all volunteer I guess that's why it's free. I can't get over the fact there are places where you have to pay for such services.

 

[luthersmama]

This video from a local station in Maine has a very brief clip from the Chief saying that the parents had "signed off". I think there was probably a misunderstanding of some kind that has not been explained yet.

For example, if the EMT's are supposed to take the patient to the local hospital and these parents were insisting on a different one, the EMT's may have been forced to say "We can't take him to Augusta" or something.

We don't know the whole story yet.

http://www.wgme.com/News/story_video/playFlashVideo.shtml?WGME_newsh

 

[luthersmama]

Our ambulance service is run by the city and it's all volunteer I guess that's why it's free. I can't get over the fact there are places where you have to pay for such services.

"Run by the city" and "all volunteer" are mutually inconsistent. It may appear to be free, but I am quite certain that somebody pays.

Any ambulance service, whether provided by the municipality or by a volunteer ambulance or fire department gets paid whenever possible, usually from Medicare or an insurance company. They are very expensive operations to maintain and must get reimbursement. The days when a volunteer service could get by on bake sales are long gone. Likewise, cities cannot provide for free what Medicare and insurance companies are perfectly willing and able to pay for.

 

[susnoat]

I finally got to watch the video. While I don't think the paramedics should have refused taking the child to the hospital if that's what the parents wanted, I do wonder why the parents called an ambulance for this problem. If I called an ambulance every time my kids fell or got hurt at that age, the paramedics would have been at my house constantly.

The answer to your question is simple. To avoid waiting in the ER for 12 hours. If you arrive by ambulance, you get preferential treatment.

 

[susnoat]

Our ambulance service is run by the city and it's all volunteer I guess that's why it's free. I can't get over the fact there are places where you have to pay for such services.

The cost is included in your taxes.

I never had a trash bill either until I moved out into a rural area. Then again my property taxes are about 1/2 of what they were in the city.

 

[Linda7NJ]

You have to pay to ride in an ambulance? They are free here. I had one called for me one day when I was at the bank, asthma attack. My hubby ended up having to come though cause they could not take our son who was 3 at the time because there was no one to watch him. There I am can't breathe and they want me to just leave my son in the care of the bank manager until my hubby gets there yah right. I would have had a heart attack from the stress of leaving him with a stranger on top of the asthma attack I was already having. Lucky for me my hubby speeds and got there before I had to throw my self on the floor.

FREE! WOw...that's cool. Here an abulance ride is about $500.00 and that's just a ride with EMT's no drugs of any kind.

If you take a paramedic that will cost ya about $800-900 dollars! They can start an IV