Thursday, December 24, 2009

Accountablity Enforced Upon The NYC EMTs In Their Failure To Render Service

EMTs Who Let Pregnant Woman Die May Face Jail Time



With all due respect and sympathies to the family of Eutisha Rennix, the woman who died after 2 off duty Emergency Medical Technicians refused to render assistance to her as she was having pregnancy related duress.  She and her unborn child died as a result.  This post is not centrally focused upon her and her child who were lost.

This post is focused upon the societal expectations that have been placed upon the two Emergency Medical Technicians per their training and the position they hold.  In choosing not to render service they violated their oath of office and thus will likely face criminal prosecution.

When this subject was brought up on the "Booker Rising" blog my first thoughts were the observation of the damning effect of the "violation of one's oath" in this case and its impact upon a fellow member of the society.  I could not help but note that there is a large number of members in this society who are UNBOUND by any particular oath or creed that they live by.  The results are clear.

Think about the construct of the heightened expectations upon these EMTs.
  • The citizens in the community recognized the need for a certain standard of living and thus paid taxes in exchange for certain government services.
  • The government agency that the EMTs work for saw the need for qualified emergency medical services professionals on hand and thus they created a position to render such services to the community
  • These two individuals sought after these positions, were offered employment and accepted.  Their previous experiences likely qualified them for these positions
  • They took medical training that prepared them on how to render assistance 
  • It is supposed that they either took an oath or had the understanding that they were "on the clock" at all times and thus had the civic duty to provide assistance
In summary:
  1. The People Saw A Need For Service That Correlated With Their Desired Standard of Living
  2. An Entity Was Empowered To Address This Need
  3. The Entity Employed and Trained Individuals To Execute Upon This Need
  4. The Individuals Were Bound To A Certain Obligation In Relation To The Society
In relation to the "unbound" people in our society - which of these elements can't be assigned to them under the aspices of community advancement?   Admittedly I would have a problem if the government was the agent enforcing some of these elements upon individual citizens.  It is in line for voluntary community groups to do all of the above in regard to do just this as it seeks to have as many adults as possible bound to a community standard that is actively enforced.

No comments: