Informed Opinions on Today’s Topics : When It Isn’t a Medical Emergency

Under a directive from Mayor Richard Riordan to cut costs and privatize some city services, the Board of Fire Commissioners gave preliminary approval Tuesday to use private ambulance companies to respond to non-emergency 911 calls. The plan calls for private ambulances to be dispatched on about 17% of the department’s 230,000 annual calls. Supporters point to a 1991 pilot program at a Canoga Park fire station as a successful example of privatization, arguing that the arrangement allows city rescue workers to respond to more serious calls. The plan now awaits the commission’s final approval before the City Council and mayor consider it in April.

*

Should Los Angeles use private ambulance firms to handle non-emergency 911 calls?

Donald Mauran, president of San Fernando-based Mauran Ambulance Service:

“They’re not going to run calls for nothing. Somebody has to pay for us. Every time we run a call we have no guarantee the insurance is good. Only one in five has insurance. . . . If the person has no insurance, they go to the closest hospital to minimize the expense. We don’t worry about your ability to pay. If we did, we’d never go out. . . . Yes, I think (the plan) would be successful. The Valley should not have to rely on the Fire Department for medical calls. That’s why they’re called the Fire Department.”

Roger Gillis, Los Angeles City Fire Department battalion chief:

“The objective is to provide (the public) with quicker service, because there will be more resources available to handle emergency services. . . . With the resources we have, should we be going to some of these (non-emergency) calls? It lessens the chance we’ll be ready for the call that does need us. . . . By the time (the program is) off and running, I don’t think you’re going to see a lot of dollar savings. The citizen gets a better service by allowing us to concentrate on emergency calls.”

David W. Fleming, vice president of the five-member Board of Fire Commissioners:

“We lose people’s lives because we get non-emergency calls and we can’t respond. With limited resources, we have to concentrate on real emergencies and turn the non-emergencies over to private services. These are calls where the individual needing treatment could just as well take a cab. . . . We had a pilot program in the Valley and 90% of the people seemed happier (with the results). I think if you put it to a vote of the people, they’d overwhelmingly approve it. I don’t know how many people have died in recent years because we couldn’t get to them. We’re not in the health care business, we’re in the emergency services business.”

Leslie Song Winner, fire commissioner who cast the board’s sole vote against preliminary approval of the proposal:

“I voted against it because I don’t have enough information to understand the impact on the public. I am looking for an analytical report on this recommended change. What I’m looking for is, what are the nature of these (non-emergency) calls? . . . I’ve seen how in some fire stations, the (emergency medical technicians) are incredibly busy. They are constantly, constantly going out. I think they sometimes go out on calls where perhaps it wasn’t necessary. Sometimes people (call who) have no way of getting to available health care. Maybe sometimes it’s not necessary to respond.”