How Aggressive Suppression?

Fire Engineering editor Bobby Halton makes statements that force us out of our comfort zone.  My first encounter with this was reading the December 2006 editorial about fire-based ems. Flying out to a January conference in Phoenix, here was the opening paragraph of a letter-to-the-editor I was writing:

I was left with a queasy feeling while reading Chief Halton’s December editorial “Rampart, This is Squad 51.” I understand the issue of protecting the fire service portion of federal funding, but the images invoked in supporting the mission of fire-based ems service were jarring, inaccurate and out-of-date. Fire-based EMS has significant challenges and opportunities that were not known while I sat in a hospital classroom learning to identify cardiac arrhythmias three decades ago.

I only knew that Halton was a former Texas fire chief.  I assumed that he, like many baby-boomer era chiefs, observed fire-based paramedicine as a first responder. This editorial was part of the effort by fire service leaders to protect and expand their turf as the federal government allocated EMS resources. Here is the part of the December 2006 editorial that pushed me to respond:

EMS has always been and always will be a major part of our primary mission. As Chief of Department Edward F. Croker (FDNY, 1899-1911) said, “I have no ambition in this world but one, and that is to be a fireman. The position may, in the eyes of some, appear to be a lowly one; but we who know the work which the fireman has to do believe that his is a noble calling. Our proudest moment is to save lives. Under the impulse of such thoughts, the nobility of the occupation thrills us and stimulates us to deeds of daring, even of supreme sacrifice.”

Chief Croker would not make any distinction between the resuscitation of someone pulled from a burning building and someone who collapsed from a heart attack at work. To a commonsense firefighter, they are all some of our proudest moments. We make jokes about EMS and “Box” duty, but the reality is that it is as important today as truck work is to structural firefights. We do EMS better than anyone else, and we are proud of that.  (link to editorial HERE)

I do not believe that Chief Croker was staying awake after midnight at the fire station waiting for a medical run. Based on published accounts, he was waiting for a structure fire in an occupied building – when time makes all the difference in a rescue.  I am sure that the  firefighters under Croker’s command would do everything they could for the civilians that they rescued from a structure fire, building collapse or other catastrophe.  I was offended at the misappropriation of Crocker’s image and tradition.

Arriving at Phoenix I learned that Halton was speaking at the Change in the Fire Service Symposium.  I took away three things from his talk:  (a) he worked as a paramedic/firefighter, (b) I have heard him speak before and (c) he is a pretty smart guy.  Never finished the letter.

RISK A LOT TO SAVE …. PERSONAL RECORDS?

I was reminded of that experience last month, while listening to Halton speak at the Fire Department Instructor’s Conference welcome Wednesday morning.  It appears he was working to counter the position taken by some that you should never enter a burning structure unless you are SURE that you have a savable life. You can read his remarks HERE.

Sitting in the big room, it seemed as if Halton was advocating a re-calibration of the “risk a lot to save a lot” mantra:

• Risk EVERYTHING to rescue a savable life
• Risk a lot to stop the spread of the fire – from one apartment to another, from one building to another.
• Risk a lot to save personal records, photographs and personal treasures - especially for the poor.

I can agree with the assertion of making a extreme effort to save a life, as described in his speech and article.

I am uncomfortable with the idea that I could get critically injured saving photos, financial records and vacation memorabilia.  Are we over-reacting to those who advocate exterior fire attack for almost all structure fires?

The recalibration concept was reinforced the next morning, with a vivid and dynamic presentation by FDNY Lieutenant Ray McCormack promoting a “Culture of Extinguishment”.  Of the two presentations, I was more comfortable with the personal opinions expressed by McCormack.

Apparently McCormack’s presentation was too vivid, as the video was pulled off the Fire Engineering website and replaced with Halton reading a letter sent by the Chief of Department Salvatore Cassano (go HERE and click Letter to the Editor video).

The 30-minute FDNY produced “Everyone Goes Home” video mentioned by Chief Cassano can be seen HERE.  It is worth your time to view it.  Just as Lieutenant McCormack’s recent detail to the Safety Command is unrelated to his FDIC presentation, so is the departmental requirement that every member view this video by June 30, 2009.

WHAT LEVEL OF AGGRESSION IS APPROPRIATE IN A “CULTURE OF SUPPRESSION”

Politics and procedures aside, the sweet spot for effective interior fire operations is somewhere between these two extremes.  It depends on resources, experience and training.  What is appropriate for a big city department, who can deliver 40 battle-ready firefighters in 15 minutes is not appropriate for hometown VFD who can get three trainees and four firefighters on the scene in the first 15 minutes.

Mike “FossilMedic” Ward

Also on FireGeezer…

• I am listening to Ray – October 11, 2009
• THEY are Listening to Ray – October 20, 2009