Re: Dirty Laundry

[jim.kendrick@att.net]

Rollie,et al;

I must wholeheartly agree and agree to ad nausum. I 
spent a shift with the Stat 5 several years back and 
decided that flight medicine was the area that I want my 
career to change to. The professionlism I saw left a 
deep impression on me. Top drawer, highest caliber that 
kinda thing. It is indeed unforunate that this has 
befallen them.

The practices mentioned so far in this discussion as 
well as in past ones are in my opinion are rampant in 
our industry. There are at least five programs I have 
personal knowledge of that engage in similar activities. 
Stacking, overflight, and just down right slanderous 
activity concerning the professionism of other programs.

Are the pressures exerted by the hospital managers and 
PR folks that great to engage in these and other 
practices? Loyality or contract arrangements with 
helicopter vendors stipulate that you "truf" to the 
program that uses your vendor while not requesting the 
closest program? Do we use the Cobra/EMTALA laws as well 
as HCFA as an excuse? Is it just the nature of the 
medical professions?
 
For example, during the time I was an engineer manager, 
I attended an employee relations seminar at which the 
speaker in her opening remarks stated that she was glad 
to be speaking to a group of professional like us 
because stated that just prior to this engagement she 
had been consulting to a hospital group. Her remark,"You 
know those medical people eat their young" stuck in my 
mind. I can only think of one other mammal that does 
that. 

I would like to believe that the source of the "dirty 
laundry" rest not with the "worker bees" but at a higher 
level in the hive. The "worker bees" really are really 
more professional than that and policies are made at the 
administrative level not in the trench.

Other authors have suggested that rules and regulations 
maybe an answer. I don't agree that a lot of govermental 
rules are the answer. In the end we may have to have 
some anyway. It may be silly of me but I still believe 
that common horse sense and the attitude "Do the right 
thing for the patient" can clean up our act and then 
again maybe I have too much faith in humankind.


Jim Kendrick, CFP
> On Tue, 4 Dec 2001, susan nittinger wrote:
> 
> > Sadly enough, this has gone on for
> > years and years in the Pittsburgh area.  I can't
> > believe it took this long to surface.
> 
> I've been waiting for someone else to comment on this aspect of this
> issue, but no one has yet, so I guess I will.
> 
> Incidents such as those described in Pittsburgh are in no way
> unique to that community or the flight programs involved.  My guess is
> that it's rather common, especially in areas where there is high
> competition between flight programs. In fact, of the few relatively few
> programs in the Northwest, I know of or have heard of flights being held
> rather than giving them to a competing program. I've heard of programs not
> handing over patients just because the other programs didn't have the
> exact same advanced procedures and treatment protocols. I've seen ground
> agencies hold on to patients that should be flown and vice-versa, all in
> the name of "keeping the numbers up." Some people think this is wrong and
> unethical, others think it's just a way of doing business because it's
> been going on for so long.
> 
> The point is that it's unfair for STAT MedEvac to be criticized for
> practices that are probably common industry-wide. Because they are a
> well known industry leader, the spotlight is shining on them and I'm sure
> that everyone is thankful their own programs aren't being targeted. Add
> some disgruntled employees or vocal individuals from competition and you
> have a fairly effective smear campaign.
> 
> Because this issue was first brought to our attention via a public media
> source (link to a printed newspaper article), there's no point in trying
> to squelch the discussion on this important but very sensitive issue. The
> "milk has been spilt," so we might as well learn something from it.
> However, if a flight program has been doing something that they are
> embarrassed to have discussed publically, it should give them food for
> thought. Perhaps other flight programs doing the same things will choose
> to change their practices before the spotlight shines on them.
> 
> BTW, we should avoid airing "dirty laundry" regarding specific flight
> programs or individuals. First of all, it's unprofessional and generally
> makes the poster look like a disgruntled individual. Second, it wouldn't
> take long to detract from the otherwise positive nature of the discussions
> here, as has happened in other forums. Third, remember to at least include
> your name in posts and beware of any company polices regarding these
> discussions.
> 
> Later
> 
> -- 
> -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
> Rollie Parrish
> FlightWeb: For Air Medical Professionals
> http://www.flightweb.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Flightmed mailing list

_______________________________________________
Flightmed mailing list