The Conservative Cave

Current Events => General Discussion => Topic started by: thundley4 on December 21, 2009, 06:53:06 PM

Title: Left To Die: Did Off-Duty NYC EMTs Refuse To Help?
Post by: thundley4 on December 21, 2009, 06:53:06 PM
Quote
Witnesses Tell CBS 2 HD 2 Techs Got Coffee, Bagels And Left Bakery, Pregnant Woman And Baby Later Died
Mom: "They Were Told, Call It In (To 911) Because They Were On A Break"


NEW YORK (CBS) ―
Click to enlarge
1 of 1
CBS
Related Slideshows

2009 Celebrity Deaths World's Most Useless Facts Celebs Who Lean To The Right Celebrities In Playboy Celebrity Real Names...Revealed! Best Picture Blunders Hottest Celebrity Moms Megan Fox -- Then & Now Jessica Simpson: Then & Now Jennifer Aniston In Brooklyn the FDNY is investigating two emergency medical technicians for allegedly not rendering aid to a woman who ended up dying. Witnesses said the two EMTs didn't help because they were off duty.

Cynthia Rennix wants to know why the two off-duty emergency medical technicians walked away from her daughter and allowed her to die.

"I think it was unfair and unjust and very heartless," Rennix said.

Dead is 25-year-old Eutisha Rennix, who was six months pregnant. She was a cashier at a bakery in downtown Brooklyn, near the fire department's headquarters.

The victim's family said Eutisha Rennix suffered shortness of breath and collapsed with two off-duty EMTs in the store buying breakfast.

"After she collapsed they asked for help. They were told, call it in … because they were on a break. They got their bagels and coffee and left," Cynthia Rennix said.
Link (http://wcbstv.com/local/bloomberg.blasts.emts.2.1383846.html)

WTF?  If this is true, and they did this, I would hope there are some sort of criminal charges, but I can't think of what it might be.
Title: Re: Left To Die: Did Off-Duty NYC EMTs Refuse To Help?
Post by: Hawkgirl on December 21, 2009, 06:56:37 PM
I think we should wait till all the facts come in. 
Title: Re: Left To Die: Did Off-Duty NYC EMTs Refuse To Help?
Post by: RightCoast on December 21, 2009, 07:05:06 PM
EMT unions?
Title: Re: Left To Die: Did Off-Duty NYC EMTs Refuse To Help?
Post by: thundley4 on December 21, 2009, 07:16:06 PM
EMT unions?

Yep, their in a union.
Title: Re: Left To Die: Did Off-Duty NYC EMTs Refuse To Help?
Post by: RightCoast on December 21, 2009, 09:15:17 PM
Yep, their in a union.

Then there you go, get fired for saving somebodies life while on a required break - no way.
Title: Re: Left To Die: Did Off-Duty NYC EMTs Refuse To Help?
Post by: Oceander on December 21, 2009, 09:20:53 PM
EMT unions?

Everyone in NYC is unioned-up, it's basically like being mobbed-up, but without the cool nicknames.
Title: Re: Left To Die: Did Off-Duty NYC EMTs Refuse To Help?
Post by: SSG Snuggle Bunny on December 21, 2009, 11:05:35 PM
Legally it's called abandonment, it has civil and criminal liabilities and I don't think unions can override that.
Title: Re: Left To Die: Did Off-Duty NYC EMTs Refuse To Help?
Post by: thundley4 on December 21, 2009, 11:14:24 PM
Legally it's called abandonment, it has civil and criminal liabilities and I don't think unions can override that.

The article said that they claimed they were off duty, but later said they were on break. To me that connotates two separate things. Would they still be be guilty of abandonment if they were off duty?
Title: Re: Left To Die: Did Off-Duty NYC EMTs Refuse To Help?
Post by: Chris on December 21, 2009, 11:17:32 PM
Are EMT's employed by municipalities, hospitals, or private companies?  Does it vary by jurisdiction?  I work with companies that run vehicles for EMT services and they have permanent and contracted drivers.  Some of our customers are hospitals and municipalities, while some of them are privately owned.  I don't know if the drivers work as EMT technicians themselves or just drive so I don't have a lot of details.
Title: Re: Left To Die: Did Off-Duty NYC EMTs Refuse To Help?
Post by: Airwolf on December 21, 2009, 11:39:23 PM
If it was up to me they would looking at manslaughter at the least.
Title: Re: Left To Die: Did Off-Duty NYC EMTs Refuse To Help?
Post by: docstew on December 22, 2009, 01:12:01 AM
Link (http://wcbstv.com/local/bloomberg.blasts.emts.2.1383846.html)

WTF?  If this is true, and they did this, I would hope there are some sort of criminal charges, but I can't think of what it might be.

charges in this instance would most likely be negligent homicide x2, abandonment, and i'm sure some civil charges could be brought up as well.  This stuff is inexcusable, since every EMT class I've ever taken has repeatedly discussed the fact that emt's have a duty to act, whether on or off duty.
Title: Re: Left To Die: Did Off-Duty NYC EMTs Refuse To Help?
Post by: Reeanna on December 22, 2009, 03:09:03 AM
According to this article, the union does not support them.  Since they were in uniform, leaving the patient was an act of abandonment. How the EMTs could just say call 911 is impossible for me to understand.



http://www.nypost.com/p/news/local/brooklyn/mike_rips_emts_in_preg_mom_death_5d0UDQYANcSrLDN4ZnqitI
Title: Re: Left To Die: Did Off-Duty NYC EMTs Refuse To Help?
Post by: NHSparky on December 22, 2009, 07:03:08 AM
The article said that they claimed they were off duty, but later said they were on break. To me that connotates two separate things. Would they still be be guilty of abandonment if they were off duty?

Even if off-duty, calling 911 would be the very least they could have done.
Title: Re: Left To Die: Did Off-Duty NYC EMTs Refuse To Help?
Post by: vesta111 on December 22, 2009, 07:49:38 AM
Even if off-duty, calling 911 would be the very least they could have done.

IT also says both EMT were running to get the D-Fib from their vehicle.

Both needed to carry a 3 pound device smaller then a bread box ?

Title: Re: Left To Die: Did Off-Duty NYC EMTs Refuse To Help?
Post by: JohnnyReb on December 22, 2009, 07:51:20 AM
Hey! What did you expect....the EMT's vote democrat.

....and that specialized democrat care will be coming soon to a hospital near you.
Title: Re: Left To Die: Did Off-Duty NYC EMTs Refuse To Help?
Post by: Thor on December 22, 2009, 10:02:41 AM
Hey! What did you expect....the EMT's vote democrat.

....and that specialized democrat care will be coming soon to a hospital near you.

That's a pretty difficult assumption to make. Do you have substantiation?? It's really sad to inject politics into a death. I view posts like these no better than what one would find at the DUmp......  :loser:
Title: Re: Left To Die: Did Off-Duty NYC EMTs Refuse To Help?
Post by: Hawkgirl on December 22, 2009, 10:15:39 AM
Should someone who is CPR certified be brought up on manslaughter charges if they won't perform CPR on a person they don't know who passes out in front of them??


Title: Re: Left To Die: Did Off-Duty NYC EMTs Refuse To Help?
Post by: thundley4 on December 22, 2009, 10:19:07 AM
Should someone who is CPR certified be brought up on manslaughter charges if they won't perform CPR on a person they don't know who passes out in front of them??




I doubt that they would be charged in that instance, but that is totally different than this case.
Title: Re: Left To Die: Did Off-Duty NYC EMTs Refuse To Help?
Post by: Thor on December 22, 2009, 10:33:09 AM
Should someone who is CPR certified be brought up on manslaughter charges if they won't perform CPR on a person they don't know who passes out in front of them??


A person who KNOWS CPR won't just stop and perform CPR on a person just because they passed out. A trained individual would check the ABCs.

As far as the intent of your question, just because a person is trained in CPR doesn't mean they are legally obligated to utilize their skills. I would suggest, though, that a person trained in standard first aid/ cpr would be morally obligated to render assistance. I hope that these idiots have nightmares for the rest of their life and burn in hell for eternity for their complacency, failure to render assistance and the two deaths they allowed to happen through their neglect.
Title: Re: Left To Die: Did Off-Duty NYC EMTs Refuse To Help?
Post by: NHSparky on December 22, 2009, 10:43:43 AM
Should someone who is CPR certified be brought up on manslaughter charges if they won't perform CPR on a person they don't know who passes out in front of them??




As Thor stated, but to take it one step further--is there a Good Samaritan law on the books in New York which states that if a person tries to help but the victim dies anyway, the estate cannot sue?
Title: Re: Left To Die: Did Off-Duty NYC EMTs Refuse To Help?
Post by: Hawkgirl on December 22, 2009, 10:51:46 AM
A person who KNOWS CPR won't just stop and perform CPR on a person just because they passed out. A trained individual would check the ABCs.



The first step in being certified in CPR, is to check the ABC's...that was a given...
Title: Re: Left To Die: Did Off-Duty NYC EMTs Refuse To Help?
Post by: Hawkgirl on December 22, 2009, 10:54:15 AM
As Thor stated, but to take it one step further--is there a Good Samaritan law on the books in New York which states that if a person tries to help but the victim dies anyway, the estate cannot sue?

they were kicking around a law in florida that any bystander who is Cpr certified that does not help could be charged with something....the law died..
Title: Re: Left To Die: Did Off-Duty NYC EMTs Refuse To Help?
Post by: NHSparky on December 22, 2009, 11:05:07 AM
they were kicking around a law in florida that any bystander who is Cpr certified that does not help could be charged with something....the law died..

As well it should have.  Blood-borne pathogens can be nasty little things, and without proper protection from that, saliva, and yes, vomit, any sane person would think twice.  CPR on a stranger could prove to be a very hazardous undertaking without gloves, mask, etc.
Title: Re: Left To Die: Did Off-Duty NYC EMTs Refuse To Help?
Post by: Hawkgirl on December 22, 2009, 11:10:14 AM
As well it should have.  Blood-borne pathogens can be nasty little things, and without proper protection from that, saliva, and yes, vomit, any sane person would think twice.  CPR on a stranger could prove to be a very hazardous undertaking without gloves, mask, etc.

Right..unless I had a breathing barrier with me...I don't think I would assist...unless it was family or a child...then I'd take that chance.
One of the leading causes of deaths in children, in Florida, is drownings...Now that I have a little one..and a pool...as she gets older..I'm sure I'll have pool parties and that's when I will have to really watch.

In this particular case...if they watched the woman drop on the floor, and walked out...well, I just have a loss for words...
Title: Re: Left To Die: Did Off-Duty NYC EMTs Refuse To Help?
Post by: JohnnyReb on December 22, 2009, 11:11:51 AM
That's a pretty difficult assumption to make. Do you have substantiation?? It's really sad to inject politics into a death. I view posts like these no better than what one would find at the DUmp......  :loser:

Chalk it up to spending to much time in the DUmp....you sleep with dogs, you get fleas.
Title: Re: Left To Die: Did Off-Duty NYC EMTs Refuse To Help?
Post by: Thor on December 22, 2009, 11:14:36 AM
off topic, but; do you own a pool alarm??

As far as a public servant goes, if it is their profession, they SHOULD have rendered assistance. In many states, off duty cops are required to render assistance in most situations (ones in which they are present). I don't see why it should be any different for EMTs and firefighters.
Title: Re: Left To Die: Did Off-Duty NYC EMTs Refuse To Help?
Post by: NHSparky on December 22, 2009, 11:18:18 AM
off topic, but; do you own a pool alarm??

As far as a public servant goes, if it is their profession, they SHOULD have rendered assistance. In many states, off duty cops are required to render assistance in most situations (ones in which they are present). I don't see why it should be any different for EMTs and firefighters.

In that case, I agree, because they ARE in fact better trained and equipped to handle such emergencies.

ETA: As far as the pool goes, I'd go farther and install a pool FENCE, one with an alarming gate.  But that's just me.
Title: Re: Left To Die: Did Off-Duty NYC EMTs Refuse To Help?
Post by: docstew on December 24, 2009, 01:30:15 AM
A person who KNOWS CPR won't just stop and perform CPR on a person just because they passed out. A trained individual would check the ABCs.

As far as the intent of your question, just because a person is trained in CPR doesn't mean they are legally obligated to utilize their skills. I would suggest, though, that a person trained in standard first aid/ cpr would be morally obligated to render assistance. I hope that these idiots have nightmares for the rest of their life and burn in hell for eternity for their complacency, failure to render assistance and the two deaths they allowed to happen through their neglect.

there's a big difference between someone who is CPR certified (although now the correct term is BLS, Basic Life Support) and a registered EMT.  An EMT has a legal obligation to act, while Joe on the street has a moral obligation.  There are many instances of EMT's off duty in their POV (with something identifying them as EMT's on the vehicle) being sued for driving by an accident.  Many EMT's will either carry supplies in their vehicle for that instance, often at their own expense, or they will not identify their vehicle that way.