Protecting EMS and what that means

I have been seeing a lot of chatter on social media and reading quite a bit about EMS services now issuing ballistic vests and providers being allowed to arm themselves. Looking at the available data, consider the following:

·     67% (95% CI = 63.7%–69.5%) of respondents reported that either they or their partner had been cursed at or threatened by a patient;

·     45% (95% CI = 42.4%–48.3%) had been punched, slapped, or scratched and 41% (95% CI = 37.9%–43.7%) were spat upon;

·     Four percent (95% CI = 2.8%–5.0%) of the respondents reported that they or their partner had even been stabbed or involved in an attempted stabbing; and

·     4% (95% CI = 2.5%–4.8%) reported being shot or involved in a shooting attempt by a patient.” (Oliver & Levine, 2014, para. 22).

When looking at the results it would appear that such protections are not needed but I cannot argue if a provider feels that where they work this protection is essential to them but I think a closer more recent look is required. This study is relatively small and the questions need to be more focused. When it comes to the “arm EMS Providers” I do think we are far from that. There would need to be specific training, classes, and buy in from legislators. What happens if I defend myself, am I now obligated to treat the person? Would I be held to the same standard of trying to deescalate the situation as the police are? With the lack of training and ambiguity of the legal system I do not think arming EMS providers at this point is the answer. We need better education, better perceptions from the general public, and most of all a unified EMS front at a national level to see EMS move towards the 22nd century.

References

Oliver, A., & Levine, R. (2014). Workplace Violence: A Survey of Nationally Registered Emergency Medical Services Professionals. Retrieved from https://www.hindawi.com/archive/2015/137246/