I stumbled across this and was curious about what y'all think. In truth, this is something I've never considered, as all of my potential experience (12 years in a Military Police unit) would have put me on the "thin blue (camo) line," and the consideration of not treating the other side isn't even there. Just in case it isn't clear, "street medics" are medical personnel that the PROTESTERS bring.

With the convention season coming up, the semi-recent adventures in Seattle, and the rumbling amongst the 'activist' community, this may be a relevant subject for some of our fine readers.



So, as noted, the question is:

Should Street Medics Treat Injured Cops At Protests?

The reasoning for not treating police is very weak in my opinion. The statement that paramedics dont' help protesters and only police is not given in the context that injured police officers are probably carried back to a safe area, while injured protesters are probably left on the ground. The argument for treating police officers is a good one in my opinion,. Taking the moral high ground on this issue and recognizing that the person across from you, no matter how misinformed and misguided they may be, is still a valuable human being. I fail to see how you can be for peace or wanting some form of new consciousness when you act just as thuggish as those who oppose you. Then again, are we talking about peace protesters or the infamous "black bloc" anarchist group? There are differences on the left.

Should Street Medics Treat Injured Cops At Protests?

Kirsten Anderberg sounds like a bona fide half-wit.




Injuries automatically assigned to cops without investigating?

It is a health professional's calling to treat an injured person regardless of who the patient is. Israeli doctors treat Palestinian terrorists, the U.S. provided medical attention to IRG members in Op. Iraqi Freedom. Even Saddam received a perfunctory medical exam. Making moral judgments about what kind of medical aid patients should receive and whether they deserve help at all because they work in law enforcement takes the morality out of the judge and exposes a maturity issue.

Mr. Anderberg is entitled to the opinion that injured police should go ignored by bring-along medics. I'm glad medical professionals don't withhold assistance on account of someone's job.

Should Street Medics Treat Injured Cops At Protests?

Are these people licensed medical professionals? If so, they should lose their licence for NOT treating someone based on who that person is. Medical professionals take an oath, and NOT treating an injured individual violates that oath. If these individual are not licenced, then the police would probably be better off calling 911.

It's a shame that differences lead to finding glee in suffering.

Man, what a jerk.

I'm definitely feeling the flow of the responses so far, and must agree without equivocation. As an EMT myself, my actions are defined by a 'scope of practice,' the legal definitions of what kind of aid I am authorized to give (for example, with my current licensure I cannot start IVs or administer controlled substances, with the exception of epinepherine for anaphylaxis), and by a 'duty to act,' which requires me to aid an injured person while on duty.

Most of these street medics are EMTs. This person makes a very weak case, and I don't buy the idea that he/she 'admires and envies' those who do treat the cops, recognizing they have a higher set of morals. Sounds like an attempt to mitigate the callousness of his/her own actions and feelings.

And for the record, I would sign up to be a street medic for a protest in a heartbeat. It is next to impossible for ambulances to respond to the middle of a protest. One of the primary issues drummed into our heads while studying was: is the scene safe? We will not enter into a scene until it is safe to do so. Our own safety is paramount because if we should be injured or attacked in the course of our duty, we only compound the already existing problems.

What the heck is a "lay street medic"?

If I take the strict meanings of the words used in this phrase, a lay street medic has no license and possibly no training for treating injuries.

If in this situation, I'd be concerned about law suits rather than the rights and wrongs of treating/not treating injured police at a protest where police get injured.

Which also brings up a begging question: How are the police getting injured? Shoot, this sounds like a war zone, not a protest. I'm assuming the police are wearing protective gear, including helmets and face guards, while the protesters are not. The police have clubs, guns, shields and tear gas. The protesters have, what? Sticks holding signs, drums, maybe bugles/trumpets -- maybe bricks/rocks picked up on the street?

Or are the police being stabbed/clubbed with hidden weapons?

I think these questions are germain to the quoted protester's views -- who is also a lay street medic. This lay street medic refuses to work medically on injured police at protests -- but doesn't mention ever having had such an opportunity. From this, I have to assume there hasn't been a police officer in dire need of medical attention that the quoted person turned away from, because such a dramatic scene would bolster the emotional arguments being made.

Rather, I gleen from the emotions against police that this person has treated at least one injured protester, and likely some pretty bloody (in both literal and figurative senses) injuries.

Anyway, to answer the question:



If these are licensed medics, then they are required to according to QH, someone who should know. If unlicensed, then it is stupid to treat anybody who might come back with a lawsuit. So using the quoted person's word in replacement for the partial term "street medic," lay people should never treat the injuries of strangers!. Lay people should call 911 and let the pros do it due to the high likelihood of lawsuits.

Sounds pretty cruel, no? Yep. But it's the truth. If you come across a highway accident, DO NOT TRY TO HELP ANY OTHER WAY THAN CALLING 911! That is, unless you know the person you're helping and trust that no legal actions will be taken against you.

I don't think protesters and police have ever had such a trusting relationship. I imagine protesters and "lay street medics" do.

A good internet source on these protester folks is the Independment Media Center website that has tons of link to evey protest of every kind. The concern about a street medic's credentials is a valid concern, and one that quite frankly, I haven' thought of before. I've found a wealth of sites about street medics, that could perhaps provide some clarity about this.

In regards to their qualifications(or lack thereof)
http://www.thenation.com/failsafe/index.mhtml?bid=2&pid=123


Portland Black Cross Health Collective


Lastly, in regards to possible lawsuits, I've talked with people who ran a "Free clinic" and was told that there is a possibility in being sued, but that in all reality-the people who seek medical help are the least likely to initiate a lawsuit. If you are too poor to go to the hospital in the first place, it's doubtful that you will also stroll into a lawyer's office if you are somehow unhappy with your treatment. The lack of concern of being sued also has to do with "good samaritan" laws and things like that.

Setting aside the legal issues, it's a sad commentary that this question is even being raised. Fortunately for all of us, only the fringest of the fringe would argue that medical attention should be denied to anyone in such circumstances.

I have to wonder if the few proponents of such a stance would deny medical treatment to POWs?

Most states have good Samaritan laws that protect people who provide emergency health care. Absent gross negligence (think shock the conscience treatment) I doubt a street medic would be held to any liability.

That being said, the person who said she would refuse to treat the Police really needs to grow up and learn what the police do. Having donned riot gear in my military capacity in the distant past, we could only respond when the PROTESTORS turned violent, then only to restore order.

When confronted with a mob, it is scary to think whet they can do. A large group with a "mob mentality" takes very few radicals to whip it into a frenzy and then the anonymity factor kicks in. I find it amusing to see where she blames the police for the injuries and violence.

J

Kirsten Anderberg is obviously a little flakey and probably a bit mentally unstable. I would bet that her "lay street medic" abilities (good observation, Authormusician ) are highly suspect.

To answer the question for debate Should Street Medics Treat Injured Cops At Protests? I would say, yes, if they are actual qualified medics. If I were a police officer injured at a protest, I would rather the mentally unstable quacks stay away from me....far, far away.

by Passion


It's evident that even among the fringe, her position is not universally accepted. Different groups have different standards of conduct, and hers does not match the street medic ethos that I provided(w/large printing)

by Jagwease


I dont' know much about those laws or legal matters regarding medical help. I am Red Cross certified and from what I can remember, as long as you have permission-you have grounds to screw up unless you do so terribly.

by Mrs.Pigpen


LOL-All too funny! All too often at America's Debate, such comments are treated as insults and not humor-thank you for the comic relief. I'm sure there are more than few of them who are off their rocker, but some people on the fringe can be very compassionate and nice individuals. I know people on both fringes that I would trust to a degree.

while I do not lke the police that much, I feel that if you are a medic of any kind you should be willing to help those that need it. now, if there is a riot police officer with minor (ie non-life threatening) injuries, (let's say a broken ankle) what protesters should do is get that person out of the area and to a place where the paramedics can get to him. but if the same type of person had a more serious injury, they should treat him as best they can and get him to a safe place where better help can get to.

the thing is with street medics is that they really aren't equipped to handle serious (life threatening) injuries. most of what they treat is exposure to tear gas and pepper spray, (standard equipment is a bottle of distilled water) and minor cuts and bruises. they SHOULD help anyone in need though.

Anytime that you have a large number of people packed together, whether or not they have anything with them, serious injuries can and do occur. When there are riots when the football team wins the national championship, or when an English soccer game is played the combination of people in large groups does tend to magnify the likelihood of injury. Some protester groups like the "black bloc" do ask for a hit upside the head with a nightstick due to their tactics. They were the ones who threw bricks and trashcans into Starbucks windows in Seattle a few years back. There have been however, countless other demonstrations that have been peaceful and orderly-usually run by pacifist organizations-the trouble is when you have a large contingent of different groups(i.e.-Black bloc anarchists interspersed w/ quaker pacifists )

I came across your thread/post during a google web research project tonight, I know it's old but thought you might be interested in my personal feelings regarding this topic since I have been a fairly active street medic for a little bit now. This is purely my personal opinion.

Let's start with... I've had brief interactions with Kristen and I feel she is a nut. Actually, all you have to do is look at her web site and read most of her articles and anyone would be able to see that. When I asked my friend about her who has been an activist/medic since the 80's, she even went as far as calling into question whether Kristen is a medic or not since she does not run with the majority and is rarely active. Primarily, Kristen is a writer.

Next... Her article, The reason this article was written was as a result/reaction/defense of her making this statement on the action-medical listserv which basically got her flamed off the list and branded as a nut.

Lastly, My background and personal feelings on this topic. I have been a nationally registered EMT-B for about three years and have been running on the streets as a medic for a little longer. I am highly active in BARHC (Bay Area Radical Health Collective) as their web master and help with overall organizing. I mostly have mediced at bay area demos but was also in NY for the RNC (web mastered the NoRNCMed site and ran the entire week as a medic).

Just a note, I would not treat a cop for blisters or slight dehydration, that is what their line sergeant is there for... but, I personally feel medics should treat police and counter demonstrators if life or limb are in parrel though, but you have to weigh scene safety first (is it safe to approach?).

There would be no need for us to approach that officer if he was not alone, he would have been already evaced long before we had a chance to treat them and/or it would be IMPOSSIBLE for us to get access. So, since the officer is alone, that leaves us with a injured, scared, compromised, alone officer with a high probability that he would shoot first ask questions later. Each situation would need to be weighed heavily, a dead hero is a dead hero.

Although, I did hear a heart warming story as a response to this topic being brought up on the action-medical list as follows. This would be the type of situation that a medic would be treating a wounded officer under...

There was an officer that got split off from his line in the mid-west, all of the sudden he got swarmed then got hit in the face with a stick or something. There was blood coming down his face and he couldn't see anything. He drew his gun and started pointing it around and screaming, people started panicking and freaking out... then some medics came on scene. They shouted thathe was safe and they were there to help him if he calmed down and put his gun down. They kept talking to him as they slowly approached him telling him their every step. They cleaned off his forehead and eyes and got him an ambulance then went on their way anonomously.

Another story, from while I was in New York, it was the Sunday big UFPJ march there was this officer tracking me and following me around trying to intimidate me, I wandered off and he lost track of me. about a half hour later I came up to a scene where someone screamed for a medic, there was a 14y/o Jersey girl coming in and out of consciousness from heat syncope, she then stopped breathing. Once she started breathing again we evaced her into an apartment building, the officer saw this and almost immediately after we transfered her to EMS that officer came running in saying a guy was having a heart attack a block away. Him and 4 other officers escorted us to the diabetic guy who collapsed (easy mistake ).

Honestly I do not like cops, I've had to treat too many people who were victims of their usually unprovoked attacks. But I do not see them as the enemy and any way of opening doors is a good thing, we are there for the groups overall safety just as they are supposed to be there for. Treating a cop would lead to one more open door and one more cop that might let us though a line to treat an injured person.

Another note, remember, ambulances will not approach an unsecured protest zone so that is why we put our ***es on the line to sometime care for critical injuries and get those people to a place where the ambulances will come.

Hoped this helped.