Firefighter should have had burns properly treated
Advertisement
Text size: small | medium | large
Douglas Grant
Published: April 21, 2008
I just finished reading an article about a fire in Merrimac South that was apparently caused when a man’s auto exploded (“Two injured after car ignites house,” April 15).
The article stated one of the firefighters refused treatment for first-degree burns. That should not be the firefighter’s call.
His or her commanding officer should force them to seek treatment and take them off the line until they are cleared by a reputable doctor.
If the burns are worse that the person thinks, and develop into a real medical issue, is Culpeper County prepared to defend itself in a lawsuit brought about by the “disabled” firefighter?
Douglas Grant
Bella Vista
Page 1 of 1
Post a Comment
The commenting period has ended or commenting has been deactivated for this article.
Can't find what you're looking for? Try our quick search:
Reader Reactions
Posted by ( chief1201 ) on April 21, 2008 at 8:14 pm
i am intrested in knowing the knowledge of fire and ems this gentleman has we are in the buisness to extinguish fires and save peoples propery and lives, i have yet to be inside of a burning house where i havent recieved some type of steam burn or have embers find places they shouldnt be my firefighter recieved first degree burn on his neck which looked like a nice case of sunburn he is fine the diagnosis was fine i am not up on all disability acts and cases but the last time i checked no one was disabled for a mild case of sunburn!
Report Inappropriate Comment
Posted by ( Cook ) on April 21, 2008 at 3:49 pm
You can’t force someone to recieve medical treatment unless you get a protective order or they agree. If they are conscious and alert it is up to them and has nothing to do with the county, but yes, the county is prepared with disability for volunteers and career firefighters
Report Inappropriate Comment