[Ansteorra-chirurgeon] Fwd: Re: So... what did the BoD actually SAY?

[Richard]

--- In SCA-Chirurgeon at yahoogroups.com, "Richard" 
<arkellvomcophus at y...> wrote:

I think your breakdown of the letter is very good. 

But from what I can tell I think that there is more behind it. 
And I hate to say that alot of us are gunshy, to include myself. 

Alot of the time the BOD/Legal opens their mouth and the word 
chirurgeon/ate are in the sentence it has not always been good/fun 
for the chirurgeonate. People get the feling that if they mess with 
us a little now they will come back and mess with us alot later. 

And when the letter has alot of sweeping generalations like this one 
does it make you wonder what else they are thinking.

Arkell

--- In SCA-Chirurgeon at yahoogroups.com, "Bill Ernoehazy, Jr" 
<dedoc at m...> wrote:
>
> So many people have written so many things about recent events 
that I found myself wondering what actually had been said.  
Fortunately, this message had the original email in it's body.
> 
> So...
> 
> On Wednesday, November 09, 2005, at 07:43PM, Joseph Percer 
<jpercer at g...> wrote:
> 
> *substantial clipping*
> 
> >_______________________________________________
> >DIRECTORS at S...
> >
> >From: "drcady" <drcady at c...>
> >To: <chirurgeon at s...>, <Bethcarlock4 at s...>
> >Subject: Please post to the chirurgeon's list
> >Date: Mon, 7 Nov 2005 18:06:32 -0700
> >
> >Unto the Chiriurgeons of the SCA, greetings.
> >
> >The following will come to you from the Society Chirurgeon's 
office, but
> >the Board wants to offer some explanation for the changes.
> >
> >The structure of the Chirurgeon's office needs to be more in line 
with the
> >other offices of the SCA. The titles presently used are somewhat 
confusing
> >and inaccurate. For example, the term 'Chirurgeon General,' while 
clever,
> >is inconsistent with other Society officers' titles (such as 
Society
> >Marshal). It also implies authority over more than the basic 
first aid
> >that the SCA provides. Additionally, the titles of Apprentice, 
Journeyman
> >and Master have connotations of a level of skill that the Legal 
Committee
> >is concerned pose significant legal risk to the SCA. It would not 
be
> >unreasonable for people outside of the SCA to assume that a Master
> >Chirurgeon has a higher level of medical training than a 
Journeyman or
> >Apprentice, which is not necessarily the ! ! case. Also, the 
term 'Master'
> >within the SCA usually indicates possession of a peerage-- 
confusion that
> >is not necessary. These are changes in name only. What the Society
> >Chirurgeon's office shall use for a new ranking system is to be
> >determined.
> 
> Although I would quibble with some of the points raised here --
 "Chirurgeon General" is no more inconsistent than, for 
example, "Laurel Sovreign Of Arms" -- the writer raises a valid real-
world issue about implied levels of skill.  Reasonable people can 
differ over the necessity of such changes; but this first issue is 
about names, not about abilities or responsibilities.
> 
> Decision One:  The BoD wishes to change the names of SCA 
Chirurgeon offices in order to avoid the implication that the BoD 
requires certain levels of expertise in the Chirurgeon ranks.
> 
> >
> >Remember that the SCA only provides first aid. Any advanced 
medical care
> >is not in the purview of the SCA and will not be performed as an 
official
> >function of any office of the SCA. Today, we live in a world with 
easy
> >access to advanced emergency medical care that did not exist when 
the SCA
> >started. The Chirurgeon's Handbook states the purpose of the 
Chirurgeons
> >clearly. We need to be careful not to promote the perception that 
the SCA
> >provides any care beyond what is required to earn a basic first 
aid
> >certification. This policy shall be supported by not allowing the
> >Chirurgeon's office to have in its possession advanced medical 
equipment
> >such as medications, IVs, oxygen tanks, nebulizers, 
defibrillators, etc.
> >The problem is not only in using these item, but in storing, 
maintaining,
> >cleaning and supplies for them. This is not allowed under the 
auspices of
> >the SCA, covered by insurance, or Good Samaritan protection as 
individuals
> >using them may not be trained or certified in their use. Having 
such items
> >present in the Chirurgeon's area of operations significantly 
increases our
> >legal risk and creates a perception that the SCA provides a 
higher level
> >of medical care than we are willing or able to provide.
> 
> I have read this over and over, and I cannot honestly see a policy 
change here.
> 
> The SCA policy, which has been the case since at least 1993, is 
that all Chirurgeons are authorized *as SCA officers* only to 
provide first aid.  Prehospital care above and beyond that level is 
NOT provided by the SCA by any of it's officers.  
> 
> Consequewntly, the BoD is directing Kingdom officers not to 
purchase or store items which are not first-aid related.
> 
> Nothing in the above paragraph forbids individuals to own, 
possess, or use any such items.  But in keeping with the policy that 
all such care is the responsibility of the provider, NOT the SCA in 
any official capacity, the Kindom Chirurgeons' office cannot store 
items which they are not supposed to be using *as officers of the 
SCA*.
> 
> Decision Two:  The BoD affirms that SCA chirurgeons, as officers 
of the Society, are only sanctioned AS OFFICERS to provide first 
aid.  Care above and beyond the first aid standard is NOT provided 
by the SCA through it's officers; any such care is provided solely 
at the discretion and responsibility of the individual who offers 
such advanced care.  Consequently, SCA resources will not be 
expended on obtaining or storing tools which are used for advanced 
prehospital care.
> 
> 
> >The Board of Directors recognizes and applauds the volunteers who 
work
> >within the Chirurgeonate. You are skilled, well-meaning and 
dedicated
> >people. Many of you have advanced training and certification. The 
Board
> >appreciates that you donate your time and skills to make the SCA 
a safer
> >place to play. None of what is precluded above applies to what an
> >individual with advanced training may decide to do under his or 
her own
> >license and with their own equipment. The SCA has no authority 
over
> >personal supplies. However, we do have authority over the 
Chirurgeon's
> >office, and within the purview of the Chirurgeonate, the SCA only 
provides
> >basic first aid. If an injured participant requires more than 
basic first
> >aid, they must be referred to a medical facility. Chirurgeons who 
do more
> >than that do so at their own risk, and not as an officer of the 
SCA. All
> >of our large events should have paramedics and transport present.
> 
> Not an issue here, but a further, *explicit* disavowal of any 
interest in stopping people from rendering advanced care.
> 
> So... 
> 
> Gloss One:  The BoD has no authority over people's personal 
supplies, or their decisions about rendering care *as individuals*.  
The BoD is making policy for the Society's chirurgeons, in their 
official actions as officers of the SCA.
> 
> >
> >The Society Chirurgeon is currently working on these changes and 
will pass
> >along further information. The Chirurgeon's Handbook will be 
revised to
> >reflect this. Again, these changes are being implemented out of 
necessity
> >to decrease risk to the SCA and its membership as a whole. This 
does not
> >diminish the Chirurgeons in any way; you are very important in 
making the
> >SCA events safer. This has been a long discussion with the Legal 
Committ! ee
> >and is not a capricious change.
> 
> Gloss Two:  The Corporate policy will be changed to reflect these 
decisions.
> 
> So... let me recap:
> 
> Decision One:  The BoD wishes to change the names of SCA 
Chirurgeon offices in order to avoid the implication that the BoD 
requires certain levels of expertise in the Chirurgeon ranks.
> 
> Decision Two:  The BoD affirms that SCA chirurgeons, as officers 
of the Society, are only sanctioned AS OFFICERS to provide first 
aid.  Care above and beyond the first aid standard is NOT provided 
by the SCA through it's officers; any such care is provided solely 
at the discretion and responsibility of the individual who offers 
such advanced care.  Consequently, SCA resources will not be 
expended on obtaining or storing tools which are used for advanced 
prehospital care.
> 
> Gloss One:  The BoD has no authority over people's personal 
supplies, or their decisions about rendering care *as individuals*.  
The BoD is making policy for the Society's chirurgeons, in their 
official actions as officers of the SCA.
> 
> Gloss Two:  The Corporate policy will be changed to reflect these 
decisions.
> 
> Nothing in those statements tries to prevent people from helping 
save lives.
> 
> So why are people acting as if it does?
> 
> I can see reasonable people disagreeing about the importance of 
being "Master'd", but such a discussion surely has nothing to do 
with helping people.  That's about "the cookies"...
> 
> cordially, Giovanni
>

--- End forwarded message ---