Amid the recent, unnecessary hysteria regarding future 911 calls going unanswered if certain legislation isn’t passed immediately, let’s take a few deep breaths and discuss the situation rationally.
Can New Jersey’s emergency medical service (EMS) system stand improvement? Absolutely. Can the solution be found in hastily mandating narrowly worded bills that likely would cause the system more harm than good? Of course not.
The nonprofit New Jersey State First Aid Council (NJSFAC), which represents more than 20,000 EMS volunteers affiliated with 400 first aid squads statewide, has publicly opposed bills S-2302 (Karcher) and A-3749 (Kean/Munoz) for several reasons.
The biggest problem is the legislation would throw the entire EMS system out of economic balance, thereby jeopardizing its existence. The bill stands to benefit one piece of the New Jersey EMS system – paramedic service – at the expense of commercial agencies that transport patients to the hospital.
The system is just that – a coordination of services created to provide emergency medical assistance to those in need. We all know altering one aspect of any system will cause repercussions throughout unless the changes are balanced elsewhere.
In an effort to improve the way services are provided, New Jersey health officials have commissioned an independent study of the state’s EMS system and funding mechanisms. Until a thoughtful analysis is completed, encompassing input from all sectors of the EMS response team, no radical changes should be made.
It’s important to note that other than the paramedic entity pushing for patient transport authority, no statewide emergency medical- or fire response organization – including the New Jersey Association of Paramedic Programs – endorses the legislation as currently worded.
In fact, in the absence of comprehensive discussion and amendments to the bills, most groups publicly expressed their opposition.
Although NJSFAC-affiliated squads are staffed by volunteers who do not charge for basic life support (BLS) and transport services, there are other BLS units that depend on patient billing to support their operations. Transferring billing authority to certain advanced life support (ALS) organizations could cause local, paid BLS responders who can’t compete for funding to shut down. With paramedics overwhelmed by BLS calls in addition to their ALS calls, how many calls do you think would go unanswered then?
Some ill-informed people have suggested taking things a step further and eliminating volunteer BLS services, dismissing them as unreliable.
In fact, EMS volunteers answer countless calls every day and serve as indispensable resources during times of disaster, including recent ice storms, floods and 9/11.
Preliminary statistics indicate NJSFAC-affiliated BLS volunteers answered approximately 400,000 calls in 2006, more than 60,000 of them with ALS responders. Projected tax savings from their efforts? Nearly $206 million.
So before tinkering with an imperfect system, we should know whether our actions could cause complete system failure. That’s why the in-depth study is vital to the survival of New Jersey’s EMS system.
Bottom line: ALS responders rely on BLS responders – paid and volunteer – and vice versa. Tilting the funding scale in favor of one over the other does no one any favors, least of all the people of New Jersey.
Sue Van Orden
President
New Jersey State
First Aid Council
Lincoln Park