Close this search box.

EMTs Claim ‘Protocol’ Prevented Them From Saving Life

fdny amb1.jpgThe NY Post reports: Two EMTs under investigation for refusing to help a dying pregnant woman while on their coffee break claimed yesterday that “protocol, training and regulations” barred them from going to her aid.

And one of them, Melisa Jackson, “immediately” did call an ambulance to help Au Bon Pain worker Eutisha Rennix in Downtown Brooklyn on Dec. 9, said Douglas Rosenthal, a lawyer representing Jackson, 23, and fellow EMT Jason Green, 32.

Rosenthal also ripped the criticism coming from Rennix’s anguished co-workers — charging that some of them “did not seem unduly concerned by the patient’s condition.”

His clients, he said, are assigned to a communication unit and “were prevented by protocol, training and regulations to intervene more acutely, as they currently do not work in a medical capacity and were equipped with neither medicine nor equipment.”

But that argument met with derision from investigators — who say Green and Jackson had a professional obligation to examine the stricken woman.

And Rennix co-worker David Waters is certain that “God’s going to punish them.”

“We asked them for help, and they didn’t help,” Waters said bitterly. “Something could have been done to save her life.”

The FDNY and its union have also said that EMTs are obliged to help in medical emergencies.

(Source: NY Post)

9 Responses

  1. The disgusting thing is that there are probably EMT people who, because of their job description, are FORBIDDEN to give first aid, and if they do, they can be fired and the company is liable for a lawsuit. I don’t know if this applies to those two people, but the fact that such a concept exists is horrifying.

  2. I would like to remind everyone that in case of emergency call Hatzoloh at (718) 387-1750. There is a Hatzoloh unit just about everywhere now where there is a substantial Jewish population.

  3. BS”D

    Ashreinu ma tov chelkeinu, that we have Hatzoloh, whose volunteers see a Jew or even a non-Jew in distress and give first aid immediately, worrying not about protocol, training and regulations as they serve only Hashem according to His protocol, training and regulations as made clear in the Torah.

  4. I believe it was the first day of EMT training that we were told that we don’t have a legal obligation to aid someone if we aren’t “on duty” but we do have a moral and ethical obligation to do so. But maybe things are different in NY.

  5. Motcha- As an EMT, one is moraly obligated to render first aid to those in need. Legally is a whole different animal. IF you are in uniform, OR identify yourself as an EMT at the scene of an”event”, OR are driving a vehicle that someone identifies as an EMTs vehicle (ie: Ambulance (even out of service you are legally required to stop, dont have to transport, but at least not “abandon” the patient)or a Hatz. vehicle dressed up with one or two less lights than an ambulance). An “out of service” sign doesnt LEGALLY cut it.
    There is no protocol in the EMS Ops guide that says that you cannot and should not render care to the patient. EVERY member of EMS is (minimally) a card carrying NYS-EMT. From the person who takes BPs at headquarters, to the guy who delivers medical supplies to the stations, to the Chief of EMS, and they ALL go thru refreshers every three years (either classic refreshers, or the new, CME based ones).

    If lucky, these two will only lose their jobs. The Brooklyn DA is already looking into a possible criminal case against these two “people”.

  6. The lawyer is wrong.
    There is no “protocol, training, or regulation” to prevent them from rendering aid. The lack of equipment does not bar them from doing an assessment, providing basic first aid, and comforting the patient. Their current assignment is in “Emergency Medical Dispatch” and requires that they be certified as EMTs and they can work “in the field” at any time.
    While it is important to note that the two EMTs have a right to counsel and, at this point, these are only allegations that need to be investigated, the attorney is out of line in making untrue statements like this. Yes, he needs to protect his clients but not at the expense of truth.

Leave a Reply

Popular Posts