Brett Wuth at 03:38, 6 January 2020

Brett Wuth — Mon, 06 Jan 2020 03:38:10 GMT

←Older revision		Revision as of 03:38, 6 January 2020
Line 2:		Line 2:
	are based in part on the rationale that none of our members are		are based in part on the rationale that none of our members are
	trained in these areas. The Wilderness First Aid Course (Adventure		trained in these areas. The Wilderness First Aid Course (Adventure
-	Medic Course) provided by Rocky Mountain Adventure Medicine Inc. in	+	Medic Course) provided by [[Rocky Mountain Adventure Medicine]] Inc. in
	January 2004 purported to provide such training. Please try to		January 2004 purported to provide such training. Please try to
	resolve this difference.		resolve this difference.

Brett Wuth at 13:58, 17 November 2008

Brett Wuth — Mon, 17 Nov 2008 13:58:49 GMT

New page

The committee's current recommendations on each of these issues
are based in part on the rationale that none of our members are
trained in these areas. The Wilderness First Aid Course (Adventure
Medic Course) provided by Rocky Mountain Adventure Medicine Inc. in
January 2004 purported to provide such training. Please try to
resolve this difference.

The committee might resolve the issues by concluding:

A/ Training is irrelevant. There are good reasons besides
training why our Standard Operating Procedure should be such and
such. Reasons might be government regulatory, liability, medical
best practices, realistic estimation of actual needs, alternative
responses, etc.

B/ The training received in the course was insufficient,
incorrect or inappropriate for students to act in these areas. If
you come to this conclusion, PCSAR may need to consider whether we
can trust any of the training received on this course. Do we need
to make sure that our members on the course receive corrective
training? Does PCSAR have an obligation to report the problem with
course? Your thoughts on these additional areas would be
appreciated.

or

C/ The training on the course was correct. We are simply
misinterpreting it or misremembering it. The correct interpretation
is such and such.

In considering these issues, the committee may wish to contact
the instructor. You may wish to consider what other SAR teams are
doing. Calgary SAR appears to include some of these things in their
scope of practice. Other teams to look at may be Foothills SAR and
Rocky Mountain House SAR. I don't know what their Standard
Operating Procedures are, but these are long established top rate
teams. See www.saralberta.org for contact information.

Brett Wuth, 2005/03/01 14:24 MST (via web):[[MedicalPreplanCommittee]] concluded option
B. Asked to consider follow up issues.

WFATrainingRelevanceIssue - Revision history

Brett Wuth at 03:38, 6 January 2020

Brett Wuth at 13:58, 17 November 2008