EDITORIAL – Sending KFR medical response issue to committee no answer
(Image: Kamloops Fire Rescue)
An editorial by Mel Rothenburger.
ASSUMING COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE recommendations are confirmed when Kamloops City council sits in regular session, taxpayers will be on the hook for a slightly lower increase than originally predicted.
Tuesday was the day to deal with so-called “supplementary” budget items, a wish list generated from City Hall staff and the public. One of the items scratched from the list — technically, shunted off to committee for further discussion — was a Kamloops Fire Rescue proposal for a $1 million allotment to buy a special SUV and hire staff to deal with medical emergencies.
The notion has arisen that the dramatic increase in the number of medical calls answered by KFR is due to drug overdose cases and that, therefore, municipal taxpayers shouldn’t be paying for the service.
Certainly, the increase in overdoses is not imaginary, but it doesn’t reduce the need to respond to other emergencies such as heart attacks or injuries.
And what about the question of which level of government should be paying the cost? If the province is paying for ambulance service, shouldn’t it also pay for the backup provided by KFR, which usually arrives at the scene first?
It’s easy to say the provincial government should pay for municipal backup but it’s not reasonable to suggest — as some in the community and on council have done — that the KFR service shouldn’t receive the financial support it needs in the meantime.
Talk of the KFR medical response service being important but something local taxpayers shouldn’t pay for, and it somehow, some way needs to be resolved goes nowhere. The alternative to local funding is that more people may die.
As Coun. Dale Bass said, what’s a life worth? So, yes, lobby the province but let’s stop pontificating about how the KFR shouldn’t be involved.
Cutting out sidewalks and garbage-truck technology doesn’t put anybody’s life on the line; reducing emergency-call capability does. Sending the issue to committee is no answer.
I’m Mel Rothenburger, the Armchair Mayor.
Mel Rothenburger is a regular contributor to CFJC Today, publishes the ArmchairMayor.ca opinion website, and is a recipient of the Jack Webster Foundation Lifetime Achievement Award. He has served as mayor of Kamloops, school board chair and TNRD director, and is a retired daily newspaper editor. He can be reached at mrothenburger@armchairmayor.ca.
ArmchairMayor.ca 
There is no easy answer. Given today’s changing medical emergency environment and in my opinion the whole provincial and city rescue, firefighting,ambulance paramedics process needs review.
We have firefighters doing rescue work, attending car accidents, drug overdose. Then the paramedics arriving at the same time or just after. Why?
Emergency Paramedics used to transport patients from one to medical facility to another. Now we have patient transport organizations freeing up the paramedics to provide life saving procedures.
Why do we have paramedics and firefighters stationed in 2 different locations? and typically both arrive at the same incident.
Why do we have a volunteer SAR and highway rescue group?
How about overall organization that provides lifesaving and rescue procedures under one umbrella.
I think everyone would agree that what ever system we have in place now, especially to help addicted people, is not working. Our medical system needs help regardless of what political affiliation is in power. However, each political party will use the broken medical system to get elected without any long term bipartisan solution.
Let’s find the root cause and work together to make it better for the future of B.C. regardless of your politics.
Respectfully
Cooper
LikeLike
Consider the loss of a “large” specialized vehicle (equipped to engage fires) in a motor vehicle incident.
Engine 2, for example, responding to an overdose near a restaurant or inside the bathroom of a restaurant, would be going Code 3 with lights and sirens. If it was involved in a collision at Tranquille and Fortune, Station 2 could lose that truck for a few weeks. Sure, there are spares but not many.
A smaller specialized vehicle that has a crew of two could still handle an overdose situation. It could also handle shortness of breath, suspected heart attacks etc. at a lower cost with no risk of losing a major fire-fighting vehicle. Over a couple of years, we could actually see real benefits.
Considering an outdoor skating rink was approved (grant money) with an approximate $100K operating budget per annum, let’s consider the logic. If the rest of the folks could be persuaded to try and get grant money as part of the annual City budget, then instead of the outdoor rink, Chief Uzeloc and company could have had two specialized medical response vehicles; one to cover each side of the South Thompson River.
LikeLike
While the idea of a smaller vehicle is a good one, and in theory “cheaper”, it’s a bandaid solution that entire misses the root cause. It’s yet another reaction to a problem that fixes nothing, and offloads costs onto taxpayers.
I would support this 100% if it came with a province-wide policy of a limit of one Naloxone injection per overdosed individual. Any subsequent injections by medical response units or hospitals comes with said individual being taken into custody immediately under the various mental health act provisions available to police.
This is entirely reasonable. We wouldn’t let an individual constantly attempt suicide by leaping off a bridge into traffic. We would take them into custody for their own good, and the safety of the public at large.
A person having multiple overdoses cannot be said to be in a right state of mind. It’s entirely reasonable for that person to become a ward of the state until they can demonstrate recovery through treatment.
They are doing immeasurable harm to themselves and the society. That calls for rigorous response. If we are concerned about people dying, and use that to argue for KFR SUV’s, why doesn’t that same concern extend so far as to step in and prevent them from doing the thing (drugs) that is killing them? That seems like the obvious first step.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Interesting point, you’re suggesting mandatory incarceration care (rehab) for the habitual addict. What I find interesting is that this is what Eby said his gov’t was investigating last year, I assume you agree new ideas ought to be investigated prior to implementation. I haven’t heard how this investigation/study has been progressing but I am very interested at the results, again I assume you agree.
LikeLike
What I know is they already have smaller vehicles available in the form of large pickup trucks, great for a two persons, fast-response team. They also already have the training requirements. So I am not sure why they need an additional million to be more efficient in emergency responses where a full platoon is not required.
LikeLike