Posted on Dec 6, 2015
How many of you combat arms people have come across what you felt were incompetent medics (68W)?
6.76K
44
23
1
-1
2
There are two NCO's here at RP who claim that largely speaking, medics (68W) are deficient in the performance of their MOS.
https://www.rallypoint.com/answers/do-you-prepare-your-medics-we-are-nothing-on-the-civilian-side?urlhash=1155159
Neither of these two NCO's have any documentation or copies of AAR's to ground their assertions in spite of their insistence that most medics are, according to them, not proficient in the execution of their MOS.
What has been your experience in this regard?
Please keep in mind I am not referring to breakdowns in the healthcare system, hang up's with the VA or slow or non-existent support from military healthcare professionals in the echelons above the ranks of the 68W.
This is not supposed to be a bitch session about the system- I am asking for your input specifically with regard to one-on-one experiences with 68W medics. Thank You.
In particular, how many of you in combat arms have encountered a deficient medic in the combat theater?
https://www.rallypoint.com/answers/do-you-prepare-your-medics-we-are-nothing-on-the-civilian-side?urlhash=1155159
Neither of these two NCO's have any documentation or copies of AAR's to ground their assertions in spite of their insistence that most medics are, according to them, not proficient in the execution of their MOS.
What has been your experience in this regard?
Please keep in mind I am not referring to breakdowns in the healthcare system, hang up's with the VA or slow or non-existent support from military healthcare professionals in the echelons above the ranks of the 68W.
This is not supposed to be a bitch session about the system- I am asking for your input specifically with regard to one-on-one experiences with 68W medics. Thank You.
In particular, how many of you in combat arms have encountered a deficient medic in the combat theater?
Edited >1 y ago
Posted >1 y ago
Responses: 7
6
6
0
I am one of the NCOs that are mentioned in this discussion, I made several comments on what I have personally seen from my foxhole. The OP questions my experience as a "combat medic". Do not get this confused, we have some extremely talented medics in our ranks, however as a whole I think we could do better as far as life after the military as per the original post was in regards to medics only being EMT-B when they transition out. Currently there is little to no incentive to grow your skills, promotions do not focus on technical ability so the emphasis is just not there.
(6)
(0)
MSgt Steven Holt, NRP, CCEMT-P
CSM Michael Chavaree are you saying DoD should include more NREMT standards to the Combat Medic/Medical Technician career paths? If so, I wholeheartedly agree! The training I received (however comprehensive or skilled) was worth practically nothing as a civilian. Having military medical personnel maintain NREMT certifications would go a long way to eliminating that issue.
(1)
(0)
CSM Michael Chavaree
In a perfect world I would like to see progression to paramedic level by the E6-E7 level DOD wide... I know NREMT P is not the end all be all, however, it is a more appropriate level of education than getting out with a few deployments as an EMT B with no other certs...
(0)
(0)
SFC Clark Adams
The competency question is not based on reality IMHO. As a 25 year Medic now a Physician Assistant I can say AIT grants the basic skills required to perform the general duties of the MOS. The real issue becomes apparent when the newly minted Medic spends the bulk of their duties performing non-medical duties and receives minimal to no additional training in their unit. Those who find themselves assigned to a MEDDAC more often than not, don't perform duties that related to "Field Medic's" duties. This is the conundrum of the AMEDD a significant number of the enlisted members don't work within the scope of their MOS training. Like any other person or profession there will be superstars and there will be everyday Joes who plod along. While the latest bandwagon is the civilian EMT certification, anyone who actually knows something about the real world can say what "Combat Medic's" do exceeds what EMT's perform on the lease of "protocols". When looking at the litany of military training available to Medics and the skills and responsibility granted to those who complete these schools, I say they are some serious Sh*t talkers posting here. Just my $.02 worth!!
(0)
(0)
1
1
0
It depends on what competencies the combat arms are looking for. In 1989 I was in a Medical Company with a mission of DMZ support in Korea. Out unit was asked to send up some medics to support an infantry company while their medics took on the EFMB. I was one of the "lucky" ones, our PSG actually chose the guys he knew were good at our jobs with the exception of an E-4 who truly wore a Sham Shield. The grunts had no idea who I was & I didn't know them so they tested me. Day 1 time to re-zero weapons and qualify, I re-zeroed and shot Expert (36/40) one of the grunts asked me if I was interested in sniper school. Day 2 we went for a "little run" which was going to be until the medic quit. I didn't quit although it was the longest run I had been on since basic. After they found out "doc" could shoot and didn't quit, they called me Doc. We spent the next few days preparing to patrol, patrolling, and setting up an night ambush. When I was about to depart, they asked me if I was interested in staying. The reason: the "medic" they had could barely qualify with his rifle and refused to go on runs with them; they figured if I had soldiering skills I had medical skills (which I did, sent 1 or 2 to sick call when I was there, no issues on patrol). Talking to other veterans of combat arms, medics were all or nothing, competent or incompetent, there was no in between.
(1)
(0)
SSG Paul Forel
"...there was no in between...".
Good way to put it, thanks for your input, SPC Weedman.
Good way to put it, thanks for your input, SPC Weedman.
(0)
(0)
1
1
0
The issue with your question is that their is not real standard to measure a medics knowledge of the MOS. What should a medic know and be proficient at? I find that a medic will be defined by the first unit they go to. There is a difference between combat arm medics, support medics, and MEDDAC medics. There knowledge base is different how they judge themselves and other medics are different and their definition of a good medic is different.
I had a very high standard for my medics and ensured that I gave them knowledge that was probably well above what an average medic knows. I have seen medics that had the knowledge and skill set that rivaled the PA's and others that could perform no more then a glorified EMT-B/Combat Lifesaver. I have also seen medics who thought they knew more than they did and where probably dangerous to their patients.
I have my definition of what a good medic is but my definition will be different that others. I also asked my new medics what was the difference between them and a combat lifesaver. Combat lifesavers can stop bleeding, open airway, insert simple airway adjunct, decompress chest and at the time insert IV/IO, splint limbs and evac. So I would ask them what they could do that separated them from the combat lifesaver? I usually got blank stares or they would say sick-call.
I had a very high standard for my medics and ensured that I gave them knowledge that was probably well above what an average medic knows. I have seen medics that had the knowledge and skill set that rivaled the PA's and others that could perform no more then a glorified EMT-B/Combat Lifesaver. I have also seen medics who thought they knew more than they did and where probably dangerous to their patients.
I have my definition of what a good medic is but my definition will be different that others. I also asked my new medics what was the difference between them and a combat lifesaver. Combat lifesavers can stop bleeding, open airway, insert simple airway adjunct, decompress chest and at the time insert IV/IO, splint limbs and evac. So I would ask them what they could do that separated them from the combat lifesaver? I usually got blank stares or they would say sick-call.
(1)
(0)
SSG Paul Forel
Thank you for your input, First Sergeant.
My real interest is as I stated it, above: "In particular, how many of you in combat arms have encountered a deficient medic in the combat theater?"
A deficient or barely proficient medic in a dispensary is probably recognized as such and will be either managed by or assisted by more competent 68W medics.
My real interest is in knowing of incidents experienced by groundies who, in combat, witnessed a medic who was perceived as being deficient to a point where a wounded soldier's likelihood for living through the experience was decreased significantly.
To the point where they did not live long enough to ride an Air Ambulance or if they did get air evacuated, did not live long enough to be treated/saved at the hospital.
During Vietnam, it was [unhappily] understood that initial training of 91A/B medics was minimal and that [unhappily], medics became proficient by 'learning as they go' which meant that the first few/several grunts they treated were in fact practice for improvement.
Nowadays, the 68W medic is exposed to better training prior to combat.
Which is why it concerns me when a couple of NCO's here at RP claim that the majority of medics they have known were not proficient in their MOS. This assessment/characterization seems especially odd when we consider there have been multiple deployments in the last ten years and one would think most field medics are well up to speed by now.
My real interest is as I stated it, above: "In particular, how many of you in combat arms have encountered a deficient medic in the combat theater?"
A deficient or barely proficient medic in a dispensary is probably recognized as such and will be either managed by or assisted by more competent 68W medics.
My real interest is in knowing of incidents experienced by groundies who, in combat, witnessed a medic who was perceived as being deficient to a point where a wounded soldier's likelihood for living through the experience was decreased significantly.
To the point where they did not live long enough to ride an Air Ambulance or if they did get air evacuated, did not live long enough to be treated/saved at the hospital.
During Vietnam, it was [unhappily] understood that initial training of 91A/B medics was minimal and that [unhappily], medics became proficient by 'learning as they go' which meant that the first few/several grunts they treated were in fact practice for improvement.
Nowadays, the 68W medic is exposed to better training prior to combat.
Which is why it concerns me when a couple of NCO's here at RP claim that the majority of medics they have known were not proficient in their MOS. This assessment/characterization seems especially odd when we consider there have been multiple deployments in the last ten years and one would think most field medics are well up to speed by now.
(0)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google