Mummy's Boy RESCUE service drink tea while man drowns?

www.dailymail.co.uk...

Police, firemen and paramedics refused to go to the aid of an accident victim who was drowning in just 18 inches of water... because they believed it was too dangerous.

A senior fire officer banned his men from using ropes and ladders to climb down a 15ft bank to the victim after carrying out a ‘risk assessment’.

Can you imagine the scene ? They had TIME to prepare and drink TEA --- all the time the unconscious victim was lying in just 18 INCHES of dirty water


But it gets worse:

Acting on advice, ten police officers who attended the emergency also failed to rescue father-of-three Karl Malton, 32, as he lay face down in the shallow water.

and this next, beggars belief:

His body lay there for three hours after a decision was made to send for a ‘water rescue team’ based more than 50 miles away.

Read more: www.dailymail.co.uk...

This is appalling. I am speechless.
No wonder the social services are failing to prevent even the most horrible abuse (like the "Baby P." case and countless othera).

People are turning into spineless MUSH!




[edit on 13-8-2009 by Ethereal Gargoyle]

The first rule of ANY rescue is Safety first and approach to scene. You do not under ANY circumstances risk making yourself a victiim.

None of you were there, you don't know the circumstances. It's very easy to sit in judgement behind the safety of a computer screen.

These comments disgust me.

From a frustrated Paramedic.

reply to post by chukka


Yes, I am aware of those rules, having been a (volunteer) member of airplane search & rescue teams in the Andes. It may not be the same but it's close enough.
I also know that it wouldn't have hit the headlines if it weren't highly debatable situation. This is not some tabloid. And unless that ditch in the photo was full of piranhas, I don't see the overwhelming danger that prevented them to rescue this poor man.

Although I find it a little worrying (at least), I also find that the article does not help people seeing things in a fair light when it shows a photo that has a caption of "The area of Lincolnshire where Mr Malton died is covered with ditches".

That, coupled with the information that the body was recovered by a boat, shows me that the photo shows nothing like the real situation, and by showing what looks like a very small and stable ditch it is giving people the wrong idea of the conditions on the scene.

We have to remember that if the media is accused of lying in some cases we should not accept everything they say when we think they are being "our friends", right?

reply to post by ArMaP


I know, you are right, the media are not to be blindly trusted.
But you know, this is not the only such situation I have read or heard about.
I sppose I am still under the impression of the repeated terrible failures by social services in the UK and the USA and around the world we keep reading about. What has that got to do with this, you ask? They are people, and their mission too is to rescue. That's why I said people are turning into "spineless mush". It seems to be a spreading phenomenon.
I am more than a little worried.

I just wrote...then deleted a large post regarding this....but thought to myself, whats the point.

This will just be another post here where some slag off the emergency services, and others defend them.

I'm so torn with these cases, i understand that there are safety issues to go by when rescueing someone, and as an ex member of the emergency services with many friends in them to, i know how they put their lives on the line most days for people.

That said, every once in a while a situation does crop up where you wonder, "What ever happened to basic human morals, and the natural overiding instinct to save someones life?"

Many emergency service personnel do a stirling job, however there are some that are happy to stand by and stick to the rules, no matter how much that goes against their moral code.

Regarding this topic, IMO, ten policemen, a load of well equipped firemen is a lot better option for a rescue attempt than no rescue until it's too late.

Then again, i wasn't there.

It still amazes me that emergency services in the UK do not have to pass a swim test. We are an island, surrounded by water (obviously), with thousands of rivers, streams, lakes, ponds, and every other area of water in every county in the country.

Chances are you might have to do a water rescue at some point in your career.

CX.

Originally posted by ArMaP
Although I find it a little worrying (at least), I also find that the article does not help people seeing things in a fair light when it shows a photo that has a caption of "The area of Lincolnshire where Mr Malton died is covered with ditches".

That, coupled with the information that the body was recovered by a boat, shows me that the photo shows nothing like the real situation, and by showing what looks like a very small and stable ditch it is giving people the wrong idea of the conditions on the scene.

Very true.

Most people......like me.....will look at the article picture and say, "Thats just a ditch..my kids could jump down there and get someone."

If the body was recovered with a boat, then thats not something available to most police and firemen.

I'm not sure if they do, but it would be great if the fire engines here could have a rapid inflating dingy on board so they could attempt rescues like this more quickly.

That would probably be deemed unsafe though.

CX.

[edit on 13/8/09 by CX]

Originally posted by CX

That said, every once in a while a situation does crop up where you wonder, "What ever happened to basic human morals, and the natural overiding instinct to save someones life?"

CX.

That's what I was trying to say. That's what I see less and less in daily life.

Thanks for saying it FOR me.




[edit on 13-8-2009 by Ethereal Gargoyle]

reply to post by Ethereal Gargoyle


No problem.

I just can't see how some personnel can live with themselves after standing by and watch a life slip away, when the rules have stopped them possibly saving a person.

I'm not saying thats the case here, but it does happen. I don't think i could stay in the services if i was put in that situation.

Maybe some people are more willing to take a risk than others, but that doesn't mean risk taking is wreckless. IMO, the ability to say "sod the rule book" sometimes, defines the more special members of our emergency services.

I know people will reply to this saying that you stick to the rules because of safety, and whilst that is true in many cases, there are lot of times when it's ridiculous.

CX.

Originally posted by CX
reply to post by Ethereal Gargoyle

 

No problem.

I just can't see how some personnel can live with themselves after standing by and watch a life slip away, when the rules have stopped them possibly saving a person.

I'm not saying thats the case here, but it does happen. I don't think i could stay in the services if i was put in that situation.

Maybe some people are more willing to take a risk than others, but that doesn't mean risk taking is wreckless. IMO, the ability to say "sod the rule book" sometimes, defines the more special members of our emergency services.

I know people will reply to this saying that you stick to the rules because of safety, and whilst that is true in many cases, there are lot of times when it's ridiculous.

CX.

Look, I do see your point, and it can be very frustrating when we're not even allowed to weigh up the pro's and con's of a situation on our own initiative.

The problem is, if you do say "sod it" and throw away the rule book and something goes wrong, you are on your own. There is now way that the PTB are going to back you up. Loss of sickness benefits, pension rights, being struck off, etc. etc. etc.

Under those circumstances, who's going to look after you and your own?

I agree, intitiative and individual courage is stifled by over zealous risk management, but in a blame culture that's the way things are going to go.

Yet, and I say this again, we weren't there - we don't have the full picture. And yes, the Mail is not a "tabloid" as such, but it is a rather right wing reactionary rag that delights in stories of Politic Correctness Gone Mad, and does tend to be rather sensationalist in it's reporting.

In any case, a very sad event for all concerned, but I doubt there will be any change.

Not surprising one bit if true. the police are only in society to murder for there friends.