LETTERS TO THE EDITOR
DEPARTMENTS
Drugs—a crutch for society, not firefighters
Your October 1984 editorial, “We Cannot be in Society’s Mainstream,” was well presented and timely. Drugs are not a way of life; but they have filtered into our sophisticated society and provide, for some people, the answer to the stress, pressures, and burnout of everyday life. To put it bluntly, much of society cannot cope without a crutch. It is paradoxical that those persons in society who are dependent on drugs for survival (i.e., heart patients, hypertensives, etc.) are not the abusers.
Emergency response personnel are subjected to more stresses than are those in the mainstream of society. We are called upon to expend physical and mental exertion on demand in all situations—and we do.
We must help our own as well as society. We must provide the best physical and mental conditioning and support to our people who must cope daily with never-ending challenges.
The fire service of America should not be a part of nationwide statistics. We should be a part of the statistics on how it can be done. We, who people turn to, must set an example, and that begins within our own organizations. Our stress factor is only the next alarm away. We should not and do not need the crutches. I am happy to see this problem addressed in FIRE ENGINEERING.
James C. Coleberd, D.O. Physician and Chief Medical Officer Clinton Fire Department Clinton, MO
Put an end to the “certificate mill” syndrome
All too often, the only requirement to receive a conference/seminar certificate is to pay the attendance fee. An example of this “certificate mill” syndrome was a five-day seminar I recently attended. Due to a number of committee meetings and other chapter business, I was able to attend only a part of one day’s session, yet I was issued a certificate for the full five days. The same thing happened the year before when I was called away to testify in a trial in another state and missed three days of the seminar. I will not be able to use these certificates as points toward re-certification or as proof of qualification as an expert while testifying in court lest I chance perjury.
How do we justify the “certificate mill” process to the taxpayer, the city manager, the fire chief, and the employer in private industry? With every agency competing for the lean tax dollars, the time has arrived for seminar sponsors to concentrate more on the quality of the seminars and insist on strict classroom attendance controls.
I feel that police and fire chiefs, city managers, and employers should insist on classroom controls and testing at all sessions, and should send their employees to the seminars with the requirement that they attend all sessions and pass all tests before any expenses are reimbursed.
Let’s put an end to the “certificate mill” seminars. It can be accomplished simply by those persons responsible for signing the certificates refusing to do so unless a strict control on attendance is adhered to. Then and only then can we remain professional.
Herbert L. Milnes President Illinois Chapter of the International Association of Arson Investigators, Inc. Schiller Park, IL
Life safety comes first in all fireground evolutions
Regarding Paul McFadden’s Volunteers Corner on “Laddering—Cover All Sides” in the August 1984 issue of FIRE ENGINEERING, I must first say that I emphatically agree with Lieutenant McFadden regarding the placement of ground ladders at the scene of a private dwelling fire. It is my belief that this operation is an integral part of the overall fireground operation and one that is all too often neglected.
The area where I must disagree with Lt. McFadden is the use of a ground ladder as a ventilation tool. This is not what the ladder is intended to do. In many instances, a victim is located just below or adjacent to the window’s location and could be cut or otherwise injured by flying glass. Also, falling glass could seriously injure fire service personnel operating with the ground ladder.
I realize the point Lt. McFadden is making regarding a trapped victim who is in need of air and awaiting rescue. However, this should not preclude the fire service from exercising safety on the fireground.
Gerard J. Naylis Captain Bergenfield, NJ, Fire Department
Author’s response: Thank you for taking the time to not only read my column but to comment on it. Letters like yours once again prove that the fire service is filled with caring, responsible fire officers whose concern is for both the civilians and the firefighters.
Let me begin my response to your letter by first stating that my intent is not to change your mind, but rather explain my views and thoughts on this subject a bit further.
I cannot justify the limiting of any tool, for I believe they all must be used to their fullest potential. With few exceptions, most of the tools (hand or power) were not designed for firefighters, rather, they were adopted by us. Our imaginations must not be stifled by a manufacturer or tool designer who had not spent time on the fireground.
I agree with your statement that victims are sometimes found “… just below or adjacent to the window’s location and could be cut or otherwise injured by flying glass.” People aren’t stupid. If they were aware of the fire, they were looking for a way out. But for the life of me, I cannot see the difference between a pike pole breaking the window or a ladder breaking the window. In both cases, the glass goes in. Oh sure, we can say that with the pike pole we have more control and the glass can be broken without such force, but that’s classroom logic (most of which goes out the window at a structural fire), not fireground logic. When we are made aware of a victim, the adrenaline flows and the glass flies. I must admit, I don’t know just how many civilians have been injured in this manner, but I firmly believe that the percentage is very low.
On the other hand, many firefighters have received severe cuts from glass. I feel it is safer to vent with the ladder before ascending, as it clears a larger -entry way, allows for a proper entry and exit placement of the ladder, lets the room “blow,” and allows the firefighter to enter at the sill level where conditions will be much better.
Notice that I haven’t said that the firefighter will not get cut or injured while performing this evolution. While entering the window, he may also be cut by one shard that he missed in the window frame or the glass left on the sill.
Safety must be present on the fireground, but will we walk away from every fire unscarred? No. I have always said that firefighters do not take chances, rather they take calculated risks. These risks will be with us for as long as the war against fire is being fought.
Again, thank you for your time and interest, and you can rest assured that your concern for both civilians and firefighters are my concern also.
Paul McFadden
