This is an absolute disgrace

They should strip him of his pension.
 
The Jury's not out on this one. The full story has not been told. The image presented is the FF was some how opposed to the politics, yet, he himself states that was not his upset. Let this story evolve a little before harsh judgments are placed.

Just sayin'.
 
Unless there was undue risk to his personal safety, I can think of no legitimate reason not to respond to a call, particularly after being counciled after dispatch by an officer.

While I wouldn't go so far as to strip him of his pension over potentially one mistep in his career, I would not be opposed to presenting him to an honor guard of firefighters from around the world and publically stripping his badges, patches, and citations off of his uniform to give him some reflection on the reputation he tarnished of the selfless men and women who gave life and limb over the years that earned the fire service the respect and reputation is has enjoyed.

I don't know what exactly is going on down in AZ, but I certainly don't like how it looks from here. I think some serious reflection is in order before things get more out of hand.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Mark Ekstrum's insubordination may have delayed his unit's response because firefighters had to stop at another station to pick up a replacement for him, the Arizona Daily Star reported.
Click to expand...

The team was responding as a support crew with a large delivery truck with tents, medical supplies, water and cots used to assist those who were not seriously injured.
Click to expand...


The article isn't exactly impartial. Looks like they are out for a story with limited investigative work being done.
 
Scout said:
The article isn't exactly impartial. Looks like they are out for a story with limited investigative work being done.
Click to expand...

I don't think the issue is the response time.

I think the issue is that a firefighter refusing to go on a call out of concern about a political impression.

A difference of political persuasion should be a moot point for professional rescuers when responding to a call. If such an issue creeps up on scene it should be addressed afterword through the proper chain of command. Not after a dispatch prior to responding.

If political opinions prevent a provider from responding to a call, where does condoning that end? Not responding to certain races? Socio-econnomic classes? Drug abusers? Religious orders? Different political party memebers?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
http://www.cnn.com/2011/US/02/18/arizona.shooting.firefighter/

"In a statement, dated February 15, Ekstrum wrote that he was a supporter of Giffords, having found her responsive and smart during a previous meeting and voting for her in the previous fall's election. "


""Countless thoughts were streaming through my brain," Ekstrum wrote. "I became distracted to the point of not being able to perform my routine station duties to such an extent that I seriously doubted my ability to focus on an emergency call."

The firefighter wrote that he decided, "for the best interest of my crew, and more importantly the citizens, to go home on sick leave.""
 
I didn't know we go to pick and choose who we help and who we don't.

I'm against things morally, but If someone was dying at an abortion clinic I sure would do my best to help. I'm not gonna let my beliefs stop me from doing the job I was trusted with.

"There is no greater honor than to be given the responsibility to care for another human being"

EMS is there to HELP PEOPLE. Not just some people.

That guy was wayyy wrong to refuse and should definitely not be working.
 
medic417 said:
http://www.cnn.com/2011/US/02/18/arizona.shooting.firefighter/

"In a statement, dated February 15, Ekstrum wrote that he was a supporter of Giffords, having found her responsive and smart during a previous meeting and voting for her in the previous fall's election. "


""Countless thoughts were streaming through my brain," Ekstrum wrote. "I became distracted to the point of not being able to perform my routine station duties to such an extent that I seriously doubted my ability to focus on an emergency call."

The firefighter wrote that he decided, "for the best interest of my crew, and more importantly the citizens, to go home on sick leave.""
Click to expand...

I don't see how the revision or further explanation of his statement changes anything.

I don't see how who he supports or doesn't changes anything.

What I do see is somebody who by all accounts was distracted to the point of inaction by a disagreement of a political nature and he refused to respond to provide the service expected and paid for.


http://edition.cnn.com/2011/US/02/18/arizona.shooting.firefighter/


"Williams wrote that Ekstrum said he did not want to be part of the "political bantering..."

"The captain was flabbergasted," Assistant Fire Chief Joe Gulotta told CNN's Brooke Baldwin on Friday. "He said you've got to go, you can't refuse."

The memo stated that shortly thereafter, Ekstrum told Williams he had different political views from his fellow firefighters. At the end of the conversation, Ekstrum said, "I'm leaving, I'm going home sick." A fire engine then stopped to pick up two other firefighters, in part to take Ekstrum's place, according to Williams.

Gulotta said Ekstrum had watched two hours of television coverage of the shooting before the call and "was not communicating well with his captain that afternoon."

"He had an inability to remain at work due to emotional stress related to events he had been watching on television and was (in) no way political," the fire department's statement said"

Because he didn't agree with the political opinions of a coworker. So What? I don't agree with everyone I work with either. Some I strongly disagree with. He chose not to do his job over it.

I never supported taking his pension away, but I still find his actions disgraceful.

Lacking the ability to do station chores or setting up a tent after all victims were transported over a political disagreement with his captain and fellow firefighters simply sounds unprofessional to me.
 
Veneficus said:
Unless there was undue risk to his personal safety, I can think of no legitimate reason not to respond to a call...
Click to expand...

This may be far-fetched, but the guy's a short-timer, very close to retirement is a fair assessment. Maybe at this point, regardless of how a scene has been secured -- who knows anything these days, just how many nuts are loose around there? -- maybe he just didn't want to take the chance of getting killed for no reason.

Would that prevent you from stripping him of his dignity down to his underwear?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
lost his nerve?

From reading the flurry of excuses in mixed patterns, this may be a case of having lost his nerve. It does happen and from what I've seen over the years, it's generally in a situation where retirement is close or family suddenly becomes more real. The risks of the job becomes more emotionally frightening for some when there are signifciant changes in his/her life. The truth may well be in what he finally said...he lost focus and could not do the job. I think the political stuff was an ill attempt to cover up the fact that he lost his nerve.
 
firetender said:
This may be far-fetched, but the guy's a short-timer, very close to retirement is a fair assessment. Maybe at this point, regardless of how a scene has been secured -- who knows anything these days, just how many nuts are loose around there? -- maybe he just didn't want to take the chance of getting killed for no reason.

Would that prevent you from stripping him of his dignity down to his underwear?
Click to expand...

Firetender,

There are certain instances where I would say being a short timer buys some some slack. This circumstance is not one of them.

It is important to understand that in many of the US fire services retirement is at 20 years. Some 25. There are also numerous "retention" and "drop" programs which give the employees considerable and disprortionate economic benefit.

When you compare the pay and benefits of a professional US firefighter to any other job requiring similar time in training it comes out to more than double in many departments and even higher is some others.

There is also a considerable social elevation of firefighters in particular. How many people have even a fraction of the negative things they say about cops about firefighters?

Now I am not fool enough to think all firemen are some special type of hero. Though it seems that many newer ones believe that title and benefits is confered simply for becomming one and some of the older ones forgot it is something you earn by action not longevity.

But as my dad always said, "To whom much is given, much is expected."

Fire and by extension, EMS, cannot save every life. Cannot be expected to throw their lives away. Cannot be be expected not to preserve some level of sanity or "normal life."

But the something that is expected, is that a firefighter's personal beliefs and opinions will not affect the ability to do the job.

The public largely understands and concedes that they will not always be able to save the day. But they do expect they will respond at some point and offer what they can.

If this person thought he was going to be put in harm's way because his officer or staff didn't like him, then we would be celebrating his decision.

If this person was refusing to carry out an unethical or illegal order we would be celebrating him.

If this person was defending his convictions for the benefit of the patients or victims of this tragedy, we would be calling him a hero.

If this person was emotionally broken down by the senseless acts of that day, we would say it was tragic.

But by his own admission, he didn't want to be part of the political side show. He let his personal opinions get in the way of responding. Then, when it was likely pointed out that was not acceptable, he gamed the system and called in sick so he wouldn't have to go somewhere he didn't want to. That is no different from not wanting to respond to a minority group, alternative preference group, or any other patient considered "distateful" by an individual responder.

Then, he didn't even have what it takes to come back to work and face the music. He took the money and left.

When he discovered that he already forfeit his dignity and professional standing, he issued all kinds of half assed statements to try and defend his selfish position.

At least his assistant chief went to bat for him to try and salvage the situation. Most likely from friendship or at the very least an esprit de corps that the individual in question failed to live up to.

If this individual worked for a private EMS company, he most likely would have been terminated with forfeiture of all benefits and defending his very certifications before an EMS board.

He got his money. He can live his "normal" life. He is not a firefighter, retired or otherwise.

I didn't strip him of his dignity. He did that on his own. I just wouldn't be opposed to doing it more cermoniously.
 
None of you have mentioned that he was NOT responding to a 911 call. This was an organized disaster response team that took 90 minutes to put together and then finally respond to the call. None of us have any clue what shenanigans could have taken place in those 90 minutes that just might cause this guy to pull out of the response. He was not being a first responder and I am sure he knew that the public would not suffer by his absence. He makes the point that the public might actually suffer if he WAS present.

Politics is a fire-storm issue in the firehouse. I've been there. None of us, including me, have a SINGLE CLUE what the specifics were that caused him to make this decision.

I'm sure this comment won't affect most of you because EMS is so full judgmental know-it-alls and they always seem to congregate on forums such as this. So, go ahead and continue to make your subjective attacks on this guy,,,just know that you sound extremely ignorant.
 
FlightMedicHunter said:
Politics is a fire-storm issue in the firehouse. I've been there. None of us, including me, have a SINGLE CLUE what the specifics were that caused him to make this decision.
Click to expand...

I have seen the firestorm politics in fire houses. I have seen people ostracised at a fire department because of it to the point where they probably could have reasonably been in fear for their safety. It did not stop them from responding from any call. Nor did it prevent them from any other duties such attending drills, public events, etc.

I have personally disagreed with some hot button issues that caused considerable tension. Never once did I or anyone else shirk from our duty.

FlightMedicHunter said:
I'm sure this comment won't affect most of you because EMS is so full judgmental know-it-alls and they always seem to congregate on forums such as this. So, go ahead and continue to make your subjective attacks on this guy,,,just know that you sound extremely ignorant.
Click to expand...

I do my best to try and see there is more to a story than a sensational news event. I also try to see it from all sides. But I have to say, when I see emergency responders live with the benefits of being such and then trying to come up with a reason for not doing what they want it really makes me angry and I really am not inclined to hear discordant excuses about it. If that makes me ignorant, I guess I am.

It is not like he didn't cash out on this, and like I said, had he been part of a private agency, he would be facing more severe consequences than his wounded pride.
 
FlightMedicHunter said:
None of you have mentioned that he was NOT responding to a 911 call. This was an organized disaster response team that took 90 minutes to put together and then finally respond to the call. None of us have any clue what shenanigans could have taken place in those 90 minutes that just might cause this guy to pull out of the response. He was not being a first responder and I am sure he knew that the public would not suffer by his absence. He makes the point that the public might actually suffer if he WAS present.

Politics is a fire-storm issue in the firehouse. I've been there. None of us, including me, have a SINGLE CLUE what the specifics were that caused him to make this decision.

I'm sure this comment won't affect most of you because EMS is so full judgmental know-it-alls and they always seem to congregate on forums such as this. So, go ahead and continue to make your subjective attacks on this guy,,,just know that you sound extremely ignorant.
Click to expand...

It is quite possible that he was disgusted to a point of becoming ill by his fellow ff's comments. I recall in 1986 when the shuttle exploded within minutes comments started such as hey you know what color so and so's eyes were? They were blue. One blew this away the other blew that away.

Perhaps he snapped at the unprofessional comments by his so called fellow professionals. If they knew he supported her w/o a doubt I am sure they made sure he was the focus of the crudest of the jokes and comments.

This is another reason I get so perturbed at the unprofessional prank threads on this site is you never know when your actions or words will cause a fellow professional to reach their breaking point. Thus your "harmless" prank or words did affect someone negatively.
 
After reading the for and against of this man's actions though I chime in my two cents.

Personally I am disappointed with this mans reaction. We work in a fish bowel from the publics eye. 90% have no clue what the daily in's and out's are. When responders make the choices, like this man did, and they become public it makes us all look bad. I have seen this happen from the large events to simple calls.

This man made a decision when the bell rang. He will have to live with his actions for a long time.

I have worked in both FD and EMS stations and know that they can be difficult places to be for 24 or more hours.

Having said that, if this man had lost his nerve or was looking over his shoulder for fear of safety or family as he was nearing retirement, then he should have hung it up and called it a career.

If this man had an issue with the professionalism of his crew he could have bid out to another station. There is a chain of command he could have informed as well if there where severe issues.

We will never truly know what this man's reasonings are. His comments after the fact only make it appear worse.

And in regard to the concern of being judgmental know-it-alls we came on this site to share information and our thoughts. Some of them are not going to be one's you like. Whats the point of having such a forum if you limit, with in reason, the things that are said, you end up with myopic views.
 
The title of this thread says exactly what direction the OP wants this discussion to go. However, I agree with some of the others who believe there is much more to this than the just the headlines.

His unit was not a first in response. The call for his unit's response came 90 minutes after the first 911 call. 90 minutes is a long time to watch the events unfold on TV and to listen to your co-workers. We don't know what all went through his mind or what he had seen in his 28 years of service to the community. Everyone has somebreaking point that can be triggered regardless of how professional you are. It might happen in your personal life or on the job. Marriages and careers can be destroyed by just one action that is deemed inappropriate or just wrong at that moment in time. Most will wish they can take that moment back but life doesn't always play out that easily.

In this situation, this FF has the world watching his mistake and never be able to go back and redo his decision.

Anybody involved in a stressful job should look past the sensationalism of the headlines just for a moment and take a close look at the path they have chosen. Will you be the same 28 years from now if you even last 28 months? Do you have adequate support and coping mechanisms in your own life. Too many here talk about burnout or family problems and they have yet to reach their 21st birthday.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top