5 petitions

Update posted 1 month ago

Petition to M. Zain Farooqui, Georgia Department of Public Health, Georgia Office of EMS and Trauma, Deputy Director Ernie Doss, Director Keith Wages, Nathan Deal, J Patrick O'Neal

Urge the Georgia Department of Public Health not to reduce the level of EMS care

The Georgia Department of Public Health released this proposal on 03/09/2018: "The Department of Public Health, through its Office of Emergency Medical Services and Trauma, proposes the attached amendment to DPH Regulations Chapter 511-9-2-.07 pursuant to its authority under O.C.G.A. Sections 31-2A-6 and 31-11-5. The purpose of the proposed rulemaking is to revise the minimum staffing requirement for ground ambulance services while transporting a patient. The current regulation requires that all emergency transports be staffed by not less than two emergency medical services personnel, only one of whom may be licensed at the EMT level; the other medic must be licensed at a higher level, e.g., EMT-Intermediate, Advanced EMT, Cardiac Technician, or Paramedic. This requirement is out of date and not consistent with industry standard. The proposed amendment revises DPH Regulation Chapter 511-9-2-.07(6)(b) to allow both medics in ground emergency transports to be licensed at the EMT level." This change would allow ambulance services to staff an ambulance with two personnel licensed at the EMT level. The EMT level has far lower requirements in regards to education, clinical experience and scope of practice when compared to the levels of EMT-Intermediate, Advanced EMT or Paramedic. While EMTs are a vital and necessary component of EMS, it would be irresponsible to allow an ambulance to be staffed with a lower level of care. Further, this proposal does not outline any new requirements that would provide the public with access to higher levels of pre-hospital care.  What this effectively means is that ambulance services, both municipal and privately owned, will be able to hire staff with less training and experience than the current standard for EMS in Georgia. This change benefits ambulance services and their owners while providing less care and treatment for the public. Futhermore, these changes reduce incentives for EMTs to progress in their careers by furthering their education in EMS. If Advanced EMTs and Paramedics are no longer required to staff an ambulance, it is possible that we may see a reduction in the usage of these skilled and experienced healthcare providers. Please urge our officials in the Georgia Office of EMS and Trauma, the Georgia Department of Public Health and Governor Nathan Deal to reject this amendment and to continue giving the people of Georgia the high level of pre-hospital care they have grown to know and trust. 

Bob Graham
5,490 supporters
Started 11 months ago

Petition to Richard K. Hanse, Patrick Kennedy, Linda Wilkinson, Michael R. Veeder and Thomas J. Burke

Save Coxsackie Ambulance

Currently the Town of Coxsackie is considering plans to dissolve the Ambulance Service in favor of a non-profit agency providing this critical service. The plan as outlined in a proposal would entail closing both the Town of Coxsackie Ambulance Service and the Greenville Rescue Squad, and having another agency - most likely Greene County EMS Inc. - take over the provision of emergency medical coverage for Coxsackie, Greenville and the Town of New Baltimore. The plan as outlined is a complete overhaul of emergency medical services in these three towns, a step which has not been taken before anywhere else in New York state. Dedicated employees are being given no assurances of continued employment with whatever agency comes next, health benefits will be gutted, and retirement accounts long established will be left behind. All of this upheaval is being billed as the means by which to save $7000. Yes - seven THOUSAND dollars between the three towns. This paltry sum, in exchange for the complete destruction of two EMS agencies with no guarantee of future savings. Perhaps the most disconcerting aspect of this is that it is happening with very little public knowledge. The Town has not discussed this proposal with the very people who will be most impacted - you, the taxpaying resident of Coxsackie. We urge you to sign this petition in order to demonstrate to your town officials that keeping local emergency services local is of importance to you and that you will hold them to account for the decisions they make in the coming months.

John Doe
318 supporters
Update posted 1 year ago

Petition to Texas State Senate, Texas State House, Joan Huffman, Don Huffines, Lois Kolkhorst, Mike Schofield, Dwayne Bohac, Joe Straus, Larry Phillips, Texas Governor, Ted Cruz, Barack Obama, John Cornyn, Michael McCaul


Fire and EMS first responders routinely respond to the same violent incidents that police officers do. While they typically endeavor to await the arrival of law enforcement prior to entering a known dangerous scene, they operate in an extremely dynamic field and even the most innocuous sounding "sick call" can rapidly turn into a violent incident. Evidence of this can be found in two studies (McGuire et al, 2009)* which showed that pre-hospital emergency medical services providers are 7 times more likely to be murdered on duty than all other healthcare providers. It also showed that Fire and EMS first responders are 22 times more likely, than the working public at large, to sustain injuries in a violent assault that leave them unable to return to work for their next shift. There are many other studies that support these findings, as well. I do not see this as only a problem for EMS providers around the nation, it is also a very real problem for me personally. While responding to a night club shooting where law enforcement was inaccurately reported to be on scene, my crew walked into an incident that turned violent in seconds. We were lead to believe that the scene was secure, yet suddenly I found myself face to face with an armed man who stood behind the kneeling members of my crew and individually held a pistol to the back of each of their heads. Had he decided to kill us, we would have had no recourse except to await our turn to be shot. These scenes have played out hundreds of times around the both Texas and the country. Every day that our first responders lives are placed in the hands of agencies who yield to political correctness and financial liability over their right to defend themselves, quite literally brings us one day closer to the next severely injured first responder. Or even worse, the next flag draped coffin. Currently The great State of Texas allows first responders to carry on duty but it also allows for an employer to restrict or prohibit their employees from exercising their right to carry. Most employing agencies prohibit their employees from carrying on the job for fear of liability. This concern is addressed in the language of the proposed bill. A simplified explanation is included below** as well as a link to an informational YouTube video***.   *McGuire et al. "Occupational Fatalities in EMS: A Hidden Crisis." & "The Epidemiology of Occupational Injuries and Illnesses Among EMS Personnel"   **On Duty Concealed Handgun License (ODCHL) Proposal I. I would like to propose that on duty first responders (FRs) be permitted to exercise their right to carry a concealed weapon for self defense. A. Currently Texas law grants FRs the right to carry but their employers can restrict or prohibit them from exercising that right. II. I propose increased training requirements, at the candidate’s expense. This curriculum would include the prerequisite of obtaining a standard Texas license to carry and then additional training in the following subjects (est. 40 hrs), to be permitted to carry on duty: A. De-escalation techniques B. Cover and concealment of both person and weapon (tactical thinking) C. Consequences of improper use D. Small arms training: i. Instinctive shooting ii. Tactical shooting iii. Shooting & moving iv. Low light shooting v. Shoot/don't shoot drills "Hogan's Alley" III. Current Texas laws prohibit the carrying of a concealed weapon in several specific locations. A. These exceptions to CHL rights should not be affected by the ODCHL endorsement if the card carrier is off duty. B. While on duty, and functioning under exigent circumstances, the ODCHL endorsement should supersede location restrictions. i. The Supreme Court ruling in 'US vs. Lopez' showed that the states have the right to set where, and by whom, those restrictions can be set or abandoned ii. The exceptions to that rule would be federal installations where 'US vs. Lopez' is not applicable iii. For these rare possibilities, as well as for fire incidents, a secure location should be provided for storage of a firearm. (Approx. $40 per unit retail) iv. The on duty exception for First Responders with an ODCHL would be similar in Tex30.06 to the FR exemption provided in Tex30.05 IV. Agency indemnification/Municipal limitations of liability A. Language should grant first responder employing agencies immunity from civil liability B. Exceptions to this rule include: Negligently failing to reasonably provide for first responder protection. Examples include: i. Failure to send law enforcement on a known dangerous situation ii. Failure to send law enforcement assistance in a timely manner when on scene units request help iii. Failure to provide accurate available information to responding units (ie. Dispatching a fire/EMS unit to a known shooting but sending it as a "Medical Problem".   ***Informational YouTube Video:

Christopher McAllister
3,996 supporters