Volunteer, 16 LSI, EGH, Victim Survivability Profile (2011)

I was intent on steering clear of the ongoing debate over search vs. no search. Of course, the true debate is much deeper than that, encompassing many other facets of FF safety and operational priorities. I cannot in good faith ignore these issues and I do owe it to my two readers to sound off. Bear in mind that there is a certain amount of ignorance to me, ignorance that I hope to carry my entire life; I have not been a part of a LODD. I have not experienced the loss of a brother or sister. I pray I never do. I cannot imagine the emotions involved. Perhaps, if that unspeakable horror occurs, I will someday alter this opine.

First of all, WTF are the 16 Life Safety Initiatives? I can’t remember them, can you? How successful is a program going to be when no one can remember them let alone relate to how they can be integrated into our daily business? Heck, even when I sit down to read them, I have to resort to Webster’s to try and define what they are trying to actually say. It sure would be easier to just say, “Eat better, exercise more, get regular health screenings, train, train, train, train, train….. “ You get the point.

Second item: Everyone Goes Home. Really? Is this what we need to be teaching? I think Chief Goldfeder was in the right ballpark with this one, and I love Omnus Cedo Domus (Latin for EGH), but the reality is, and even Billy G will tell you, everyone doesn’t always go home! Now I don’t think Chief is off base, as his point is well made and documented towards what I believe is the mission to stop dying for STUPID reasons. When LODD deaths are caused by lack of PPE, apparatus accidents, seatbelts not being used, and all the other dumb ways we can find to cause mayhem, attention is needed. I see a problem when the EGH mantra is pushed and then used to argue against searching buildings or when EGH becomes a portion of a risk management checklist. “No, we won’t search the house because we don’t want to violate the EGH rule…..” No thanks, not in my department.

Now for the cutting-edge, “Victim Survivability Profiling”: Are you serious? When do I fit this into my incident command system? Is this going to screw with my COAL WAS WEALTH (not that I can remember that one at two AM)? Does this come with a “challenge flag” like in the NFL, so that if the victim doesn’t agree they can get an instant replay? I say we take the “victim” out and add “FF” to survivability profile, using “FF Survivability Profiling” to decide when to go in. If I can put FF’s in, I do and we search. Bottom line is that the house isn’t vacant until WE say it’s vacant. If there is any way we can put a crew in to search, we should. Now I’m not saying, “Risk management be damned”, but we have an obligation…

Yes, an obligation. Even though I am a Volunteer Firefighter, there is a certain obligation. That’s right, I volunteer. I volunteer to train, to jump from bed at 2 AM, and to even put myself in jeopardy of dying to search a structure for occupants. I don’t have to, but I will because I volunteer; because I feel obligated. That doesn’t mean I have a “Hero Complex”, or a death wish/martyr attitude. I will risk a lot to save a lot, and sometimes that may mean risking a lot just in case someone, anyone, is in the structure. I guess in the end it comes down to the simple fact that no one makes me do it, I just feel I have to. It’s what we, firefighters, are expected to do. We go into burning buildings and search.

The 16 LSI and EGH campaigns are great for the overweight, undertrained, PPE-lacking lazy MUTTS. Let’s move forward by reducing the LODD caused by preventable, unnecessary incidents, but until civilians stop dying in fires, firefighters will search and on occasion, die for them.