Do firefighters and EMS have any obligation to respond?

[ishyid]

As being a Firefighter in Western Washington myself, firefighters and EMS personell HAVE the obligation to respond to any call they are dispatched to. But each individual HAS the ability to withdraw themselves from the situation and take no action at the scene. Although there probably will be disciplinary actions taken on them ounce it is done and over with. Hope this helps.

 

[simmonsjoe]

In VA if you are off-duty and private:

If someone directly addresses you and ask for help, you are duty bound by law.
For instance, if you are passing an accident and the cop notices you have a paramedic sticker on your vehicle, or just recognizes you from around, and addresses you regarding care in any way, you are now duty bound.

Being 'called in' to a scene, however, would be based on contractual obligations.

 

[eye95]

As being a Firefighter in Western Washington myself, firefighters and EMS personell HAVE the obligation to respond to any call they are dispatched to. But each individual HAS the ability to withdraw themselves from the situation and take no action at the scene. Although there probably will be disciplinary actions taken on them ounce it is done and over with. Hope this helps.

Once again, the OP was referring to a LEGAL obligation to respond. The SCOTUS has explicitly stated that police do not have a LEGAL obligation to respond. That someone could be fired for violating departmental policy does not constitute a LEGAL obligation, just a more-or-less contractual obligation to the employer only, not to the members of the public in need.

Do FF and EMS have an obligation to the citizens in need to respond? If so, how exactly would this "obligation" be enforced? You see, without a LEGAL consequence, there is no LEGAL obligation.

 

[FireMedic775]

What about ordered not to act?!?!?!

It's well noted and documented that the Supreme Court had made it very clear that the police do not have any obligation to respond to calls, nor do they have any obligation to protect the lives of others in their presence. With that said, do firefighters and EMS fall under the same circumstances? If a house if burning down, do firefighters have no obligations to respond if a call is made? Do EMS have no obligation to respond to a call of someone having a heart attack?

I have an additional question to this:
What if your Duty Officer / Chief has a lower scope of practice than you (Basic vs Paramedic) and orders you NOT to respond to a child in cardiac arrest? Actual scenario: A two man ALS unit has been dispatched and responded, so your two man ALS unit also responds to provide assistance to run through the ACLS protocol and maximize the ability to provide treatment and care. No other information about the patient is given, and no responders are on scene. The Chief states he wants you to stand down and just let one of the two man units respond. Is this legal? Am I still liable for failure to act? He may outrank me, but my scope gives me greater liability...

 

[KRM59]

Not sure in your state

I am unsure about other states but in my state if you accept and take First Aid and CPR training you are bound to help in a situation. They inform you of this before you agree to the training. so i would think EMS and or Fire fighters would be help to at least the same standard as a private individual.

 

[PALO]

I am unsure about other states but in my state if you accept and take First Aid and CPR training you are bound to help in a situation. They inform you of this before you agree to the training. so i would think EMS and or Fire fighters would be help to at least the same standard as a private individual.

i would also say pay attention to the first part of your sentence about "but in my state"

iow, i am assuming this thread is asking if there is a requirement FEDERALLY. obviously, under state law, there may be some states that widely different standards than others

i have been a lifeguard in two states, a firefighter in one, and a cop in three, so i can certainly understand - stuff varies

 

[slapmonkay]

Duty to rescue laws, however, do. There's no specific "duty to rescue" laws on the books here in the U.S., as our law based on English common law, which also contains no such requirement. There are portions of good samaritan laws, however, which contain duty to rescue clauses, most notable in FL, MA, MN, OH, RI, VT, WA, and WI.

In WA, an individual only has the duty to inform (IE: call the report in to 911), punishable as a misdemeanor. There is no duty to rescue. See RCW 9.69.100. I assume others in your list of states may be similar.

WA good samaritan law can be found in RCW 4.24.300, which does not list a duty to rescue either.

 

[KRM59]

i would also say pay attention to the first part of your sentence about "but in my state"

iow, i am assuming this thread is asking if there is a requirement FEDERALLY. obviously, under state law, there may be some states that widely different standards than others

i have been a lifeguard in two states, a firefighter in one, and a cop in three, so i can certainly understand - stuff varies

That is why i stated i was unsure of other states. I would how ever like to interject a personal thought, if you do not feel it your duty to respond/help, either by orders or mandate then why would you choose that profession. If it is a matter of a timely basis, what is a timely basis? is that not relative? i would hope to think all responders do so as quickly as they possibly can. So IMHO how can any department dictate a certain time to respond. things happen,traffic ect.

 

[ncwabbit]

forgive me KRM59, a clarification if i might inquire: did you receive your FA/CPR training from the American Red Cross or through an instructor of formal training for community responder/fire fighter as part of their basic training core to assist their organization?

The ARC safety programs course materials do not articulate 'john Q public' must respond and render aid per se.

Now like the other 900 pound gorilla roaming on this thread, can you provide a cite that covers your statement that KY requires 'john Q public' is quote: bound to help unquote if they are trained 'john Q public' as a first aider in FA/CPR.

wabbit

ps: fortunately, as a highly trained 'john Q public', i have in the past and will continue to exercise my personal choice to decide if i wish to render aid to other members of 'john Q public'. Additionally, you will not discern any EMT/first responder/ad nausm nor NRA/other gun stickers on my vehicle to preclude anyone deciding i should be assisting in someone's emergency. I can live with my moral decision not to assist and will yet stay highly trained for my personal use.

 

[ncwabbit]

slapmonkey, your RCW 9.69.100 cite takes me to

Duty of witness of offense against child or any violent offense — Penalty.

where did i get lost?

wabbit

 

[slapmonkay]

Duty to rescue laws, however, do. There's no specific "duty to rescue" laws on the books here in the U.S., as our law based on English common law, which also contains no such requirement. There are portions of good samaritan laws, however, which contain duty to rescue clauses, most notable in FL, MA, MN, OH, RI, VT, WA, and WI.

In WA, an individual only has the duty to inform (IE: call the report in to 911), punishable as a misdemeanor. There is no duty to rescue. See RCW 9.69.100. I assume others in your list of states may be similar.

WA good samaritan law can be found in RCW 4.24.300, which does not list a duty to rescue either.

slapmonkey, your RCW 9.69.100 cite takes me to

Duty of witness of offense against child or any violent offense — Penalty.

where did i get lost?

wabbit

Sorry, ill clerify. I was trying to fix a mis-information.

The original purpose of that cite was to show that an individual has a duty to inform/report a violent offense, it also would include any other requirements of someone witnessing such offense. This was a cite for my first sentence.

Plus, the 'duty to rescue' Wikipedia page that since9 posted (where he got the list of states with duty to rescue) cites the .100 in the foot notes as its source for WA. As one can clearly read, no where in the .100 does a witness have a duty to rescue or assist. In fact, if you look closer I believe since 9 mis represented information from the Wikipedia page. He lists all states that a citizen has any obligation.

Also, my last sentence contains the cite to wa good citizen law which does not list an obligation to assist.

I have not found any other laws in WA that list a requirement to assist.

 

[J1MB0B]

Yes, there is a legal obligation to respond for Emergency medical services. The good samaritan laws don't always apply to professional rescuers, paid or volunteer.

I know you guys will be screaming for a cite to look at, so tomorrow I will dig trough the protocol book and post up the specifics.
(I only have the protocol book for Pierce County Washington, but I would bet that all the counties in WA [and most states]are close because the states make these laws)

 

[slapmonkay]

Yes, there is a legal obligation to respond for Emergency medical services. The good samaritan laws don't always apply to professional rescuers, paid or volunteer.

I know you guys will be screaming for a cite to look at, so tomorrow I will dig trough the protocol book and post up the specifics.
(I only have the protocol book for Pierce County Washington, but I would bet that all the counties in WA [and most states]are close because the states make these laws)

Jimmbob, the last little bit here (good samaritan) we were actually talking about a normal citizen coming across an accident scene or other issue and there duty to help/rescue if any. I am aware that good samaritan laws don't cover paid providers.

That said, I would still be interested in getting back to the root question and seeing your cite on the subject.

 

[KRM59]

forgive me KRM59, a clarification if i might inquire: did you receive your FA/CPR training from the American Red Cross or through an instructor of formal training for community responder/fire fighter as part of their basic training core to assist their organization?

The ARC safety programs course materials do not articulate 'john Q public' must respond and render aid per se.

Now like the other 900 pound gorilla roaming on this thread, can you provide a cite that covers your statement that KY requires 'john Q public' is quote: bound to help unquote if they are trained 'john Q public' as a first aider in FA/CPR.

wabbit

ps: fortunately, as a highly trained 'john Q public', i have in the past and will continue to exercise my personal choice to decide if i wish to render aid to other members of 'john Q public'. Additionally, you will not discern any EMT/first responder/ad nausm nor NRA/other gun stickers on my vehicle to preclude anyone deciding i should be assisting in someone's emergency. I can live with my moral decision not to assist and will yet stay highly trained for my personal use.

wabbit,
i had no intention to offend anyone, and i am certainly not a 900 pound gorilla. all i stated was what i have told every two years by the instructer from the ARC. I took what i was told at face value. but the rest of my statement i stand by...you want to pick and choose whom you help? hope your on the other side of that decission some time. if that is your profession, i salute you. and you have my respect. but what i posted is my opinon nothing more. but as normal you post you get slammed by some one with a chip on there shoulder, or think there the only one with the right answer. thats why i seldom post,you either get called some stupid name or get a speech on your spelling or any other little imperfection you may have.

 

[J1MB0B]

I talked to my lead instructor and she said as far as legal requirement to respond, there is and there isn't. We went through the protocol book for Pierce County, WA and were unable to find specific references to RCW or WAC. That said, each state, municipality and or agency all have different protocols and laws. I know its not the answer I promised, but I am still researching it. All protocols for every agency are public record so in most places you should be able to google them. I'll put up more info as I find it.

 

[Kivuli]

Opinion only:

I suspect Firefighters and EMTs/Paramedics are covered by the same CYA of "no duty to respond". I doubt you'd find one that wouldn't WANT to respond, however. Barring the usual "Man, this guy is total BS. He calls us three times a week just so he can get a ride" complaining, though I bet they still go.

 

[Rudderpinne]

Everyone's SOP's/SOG's are different, far as Fire Department wise.

Paid Fire Departments are required to respond, it says so in our SOP's. IF our tones go off.

Volunteer is semi different, (Also depending on the SOG's/SOP's) they are required to respond if they get a TRUCK IN SERVICE. If no volunteers can get a truck in service then obviously they cannot go. It usually goes three tone outs, then the next closest department gets toned out to go to that run.

Volunteers are required to go, if they get a truck in service. If they do not then they cannot. Around where I live, most volunteers never have a problem getting a truck in service.


Of course that's just in MY area, and this is just my knowledge. Google Fire Department SOP's if you want to look into it. Every state is going to be different, obviously.

 

[Firedawg314]

It's well noted and documented that the Supreme Court had made it very clear that the police do not have any obligation to respond to calls, nor do they have any obligation to protect the lives of others in their presence. With that said, do firefighters and EMS fall under the same circumstances? If a house if burning down, do firefighters have no obligations to respond if a call is made? Do EMS have no obligation to respond to a call of someone having a heart attack?

I am a firefighter... I can't speak for every department etc. In general, our "nature" of our jobs is to go to burning buildings, rescue injured people, just like EMS personnel, etc. It all depends on the scene. If the house/build is to far gone (over 80% on fire) WE are not going in.... you might say... oh what if a person is in there. At that point, there's 1,000% chance they are not going to make it. Just like a cop, they will respond to your call, say you have a crazy wife and her sister has you at gun point with some AR's and they both are expert shooters! They will respond with the proper gear, manpower, etc. Now, say you have an rouge army and they have the lastest weapons... yeah, they going to watch from a distance and call in U.S. Army, etc.

Everything is about "safety", there is a science to our careers/ jobs. Once its outside of that, no one is goin to "repsond". Think about Katrina (yeah, horrible speller), emergency personnel really cannot do anything until the storm left. Its all about taking control of th scene. Some choices are not what many would do... but at the same time, you are not in the shoes of who is in charge.

 

[Logan 5]

I was volly FF for a few years and even cross trained EMT-B. I guess the standards must be different per state. You go to the scene upon call-out, but you also have the right to declare the scene unsafe. As FF, that's almost impossible to justify other than not having the equipment or training. If that's the case, count on getting reemed by the Lt., Capt. and then the Chief. OTOH, if you are on scene as EMT, you and your partner have the right to declare "scene is not safe"", thus until it is, you do not have to enter. You are there to save lives, not to make yourself another victim.

 

[Kivuli]

Something important to consider is that a department's SoPs or policies are not the same thing as a legal mandate to respond.