# embed the medics right into the Coy's



## HItorMiss

Not sure if this should really go here but I have thought long and hard about this over a 4 year period. I have been slowly formulating a proposal for my idea and since it envolves you medics I wanted true feedback on it before it goes from my head to a serious paper.


In my close to 6 years of experince  I have seen a lack of true medical support to infantry section/Pl/Coy/Bn's not through any lack of medical training for our Medics(who on a personal note I will add are generally excellent) but because of several reasons they are

1. lack of man power 

2 because of above reason medics are not always there when needed

3. Trust (not that the average soldier doesn't trust a medic it's simply a familiarity thing I am getting at and will explain in detail later)

4 Training in Inf style operations

these are of course not a complete list nor are they 100% accurate for every unit.


Now I will address my reasons in a fashion that I belive would or could solve this situation following the numerical reasoning above


1. The obvious: the Bn's need more medic's attached posted into them. Now this may of course mean less medics at the home unit (eg 2fd Amb) however this could also be avoided with of course more medics in general (perfect world solution maybe?)

2. If the Bn's had more medics they could and should attach them right into Company's not the UMS, the medic or team of medics would be with the company HQ's and train with the soldiers of the company everyday. I am aware that medics are motional attahced to Company's but many times I have never seen my medic team not even on an Ex.

3.It is my belife that soldiers need to trust the medic to truely open up and let the medic know whats is going on, how many times in your career has a soldier said "no problem doc it's good to go" or simply avoided the medics so as to not have to show he/she is sickness or injured ( I have done this more then once in my time out of a need to be tough and because I didn't really trust the medic to take my word for what I could handle) with trust comes respect if the soldiers trusts the medic and respects the medic they will open up and allow the medic (in a day to day situation) do his/her job, I personaly have taken the word of a trusted medic one I knew would not steer me worng and knew that I never saw him without a real reason. The medic if employed right in the company would now be part of the team training everyday with the troops doing PT, locker security etc etc... nothing but good things can come from a closer relationship.

4. If the medics were training with the troops from the Companies this one take's care of itself, the medic would learn whats what, more then the basics and would fit into the force better and becuse of that be a force multiplier.

I have more specifics of course and could go on and on about what led me to start thinking this way from a personal basis and in fact would love to go further just let me know what you think about it now and see what you would to add or change in this idea.


----------



## combat_medic

I'm in complete agreement with you, however the higher ranking officers in NDHQ don't see why an infantryman would have need of a medic on a regular basis... apparently they don't injure themselves... ever. I've been fighting this same fight for 5 years now, and have been losing miserably, but if these officers ever see the light, I'll be the first one back on the integrated med support bandwagon, let me assure you.


----------



## McG

Does an infantry company require medics in garrison?  Would there be sufficient depth in a company for the medics to conduct thier own skills training & proffessional development?

The UMS is the lowest level the medics should be kept at.  From there, they can be tasked to support sub-unit training or operations as required.  They would also have depth to conduct thier own training (thus ensureing an even better quality of medic available).


----------



## pbi

Having had the priveliges of commanding a rifle company both in Canada and on operations, and having commanded the Admin Coy of a mech battalion, I have some strong feelings on this.

First of all, I disagree totally with the recent pillage of the Army's medical services by the CFMS: yet another "stove-pipe empire" in our tiny little force. Pulling the medics out of the field units (and then "re-attaching them") was IMHO a mistake.

In my opinion, (and I think that most Inf would agree with me...) the absolute minimum requirement is one MA per platoon, with Combat Lifesavers trained in each section. IV drips and morphine should be ready available, not locked up back with the MO where they are useless. At Coy HQ should be the senior coy MA. Two ambs of whatever type are also, IMHO, a minimum for a coy in today's dispersed ops. This is pretty well how we equip a mech rifle coy for ops now (give or take).

In garrison, the MAs should belong to Med Pl (Admin Coy) for tech trg and admin. For all exercises, ranges, and PT a couple of times a week at least, the coy MAs should be with their rifle platoons, either doctoring or training. MAs are like any supporters: they work best when they're a well-known and accepted part of the team. Any Inf soldier who has been on ops these days knows how important our MAs are.In my experience a good MA is a tight part of the team who is respected by the soldiers. Cheers.


----------



## HollywoodHitman

Very difficult to disagree with that Sir,

We have a couple medics who were re musters from the rifle company and their presence in the field as members of the team is missed. 

TM


----------



## combat_medic

Gee, why would a badly injured soldier need an IV, chest decompression or morphine right away? Surely he can wait an hour until he gets to see the MO...  : What do you mean he'll be dead by then? Won't a field dressing keep him alive? Because that's all he's going to get!

/sarcasm

I'm of the personal belief that the CFMS was so focused on their own power and importance; getting high numbers in Med Coys and breaking off from the army that they completely forgot about patient care. I believe that the CF has suffered a great loss because of this, and will reap some significant reprecussions if there is ever a major conflict. This decision could cost a lot of lives in the long run, and I think it's sad that this is where their priorities are. 

pbi: excellent points, all.


----------



## Infanteer

I will second PBI's assessment.

When I worked with the Brits they set things up in a similar fashion and it seemed to work well.   I got to do things with their "Infantry Medic" training that I never touched in the CF (morphine, IV, etc).   For some reason, when first aid is instructed to our Infantry soldiers, it is assumed that the greatest cause of death on the battlefield will be falling off a ladder....

Needless to say, the unfamiliarity between the medics who were jetted into our camp (they weren't even part of the battlegroup, they were NSE) led to a mediocre relationship on camp at best - not good considering that we depended on each other if the poop hit the fan (force protection - casualty care).


----------



## HollywoodHitman

NSE says it all....don't get me started!


----------



## dutchie

nse:

"Where's your rifle, Cpl Bloggins?"
"Well, I've got 'er broken down in the storage bins on the HL of course, Sgt."
"Hey, good idea! More room in the cab for your ghetto blaster and mondo coffe cup and no NDs!"

Sorry, didn't mean to interupt. Carry on.


----------



## Armymedic

Ho boy...(Armymedic taking a deep breath),

First off, medical assets attached to any operations in an element under the NCE and the senior medical authority (Task force Surg) answers to the Commander.

While I might personally disagree with decisions of my higher headquarters, those decisions are made well above my pay grade, and as a supervisor I must convey a positive outlook of changes....

So, CF H Svc Gp is currently undergoing changes in how it provides care. First of these is the "improvement" of in garrison care (Primary Care Restructuring Initiative). One advantage of PCRI is the centralization of all in garrison care so that rescourses like medical admin, pharmacy, and secondline resources such as lab and X ray are quick and easily accessible to all. Further it will reduce the problems of operational shortages by increasing the number of civilian full time providers, and pooling the higher first line medical pers (MO's) so that they can cover each other off.

Hence on of the first advantages. In the PCRI concept units are grouped together into Care Delivery units. These units will have a core civilian staff, Dr, Nurse, receptionist, and MOs, PA and Med Techs. Following the lessons learned from 1 Fd Amb CDU trial, it was found that the best use of med techs was to maintain manning at the UMS and surge a fration of those med techs to the CDU for sick parade DAGs etc. The remainder would be avail to do PT, courses and tasks at the will of the Unit (OPCON), and all could deploy to the field etc, while still maintaining in garrison care for the rear parties.

Med Techs will remain at the UMS to do tasks, courses, improve mil skills, etc. Also there will be requisite periodic maintenance training and up grading training to be undertaken. Also (down side for the cbt units) brigade level and higher tasks could be tasked to a UMS to fill vs the Fd Amb, thereby lessing the strain on the Med Coys who will be undermanned due to training.

The major disadvantage (to you as a non-medical) is that now your firstline care will be at some other central location. Hence you will experience more bureaucracy in getting OTC medications longer waits for sick parade and having to travel away from your work for care.

Of course, until we are brought up to strength like every other trade in the CF, we will not be able to fill all the positions required while still maintaining the operational tempo the CF demands of us.


----------



## R22eRKodiak

Although I will not argue here for or against the centralization of medics at higher levels than before, I must admit that I am concerned that the greater separation that medics have from front line units, the more will it be forgotten that although 99% of a medic's job is done under relatively stable conditions in garrison, 1% of the time (figuratively, of course), he will be required to follow along with combat troops and be able to perform fieldcraft with sufficient skill so as to not get the people he is attached to killed.

I do not say this to say that medical pers are willingly creating a separation from garison and field skills.  We already see the bitterness and competition that can sprout from two different battalions, despite being part of the same regiment.  The useless and sad competition between 1RCR and 3RCR springs to mind, but it is quite the same throughout the Army.  I am proud to say that the Vandoos are gradually learning to work together, but we still have much improvement to do as well.  So much more could be accomplished if we weren't all trying to be the biggest fish in a little pond and putting our efforts together to accomplishing the great things we are capable of.  Can't we just all get along? ;D  Anyway, I digress.  What I mean to say is that if so similar organizations can create rifts by simply trying to work a little differently, it will be very easy for 'non-embedded' (for lack of a better word) medical personnel to forget the other part of their job, simply because they will not be exposed to it.  It is human nature.  

This could be greatly improved if we ensure that sufficient numbers of medical personnel are invited and able to attend training events at different levels (sec and all the way up to BG and beyond).  I realize that there is a huge number of taskings sapping their numbers daily, but it should certainly be a focus.  Get the medics out from their centralized areas to work directly with the troops on a regular basis.  As I understand there is some form of provision for this.  However, the trend has been to concentrate all medical personnel at Coy and UMS levels and not detach them down to pl level, as this is not 'Canadian Doctrine'.

Unfortunately, it is time for us to open our eyes and see what the rest of the planet is doing.  We are not fighting WW II or the Soviet/Fantasian/Granovian army.  We can no longer afford to maintain the comfortable safety blanket wrapped around our heads and hope that all the badness will go away.  The Americans have learned that having medics at much lower levels increases survival rates of their soldiers.  Why do they know this?  Not because it has been wargamed, but rather because they get shot at every day.  I believe that these lessons are are slowly dawning on us as well.  We would not be talking about them here otherwise.

It is important for medical pers to have good field skills and exposure to frontline combat troops jobs, as it will be much less of a culture shock and a less dramatic transition for them when they are next asked to perform a 30 km combat patrol with snowshoes while attached to an infantry coy.  If they are not allowed to train up at the same time and with the same troops, then not only will they not enjoy themselves and not learn anything, they might actually become casualties themselves.  Worse yet, they may do something that will get the patrol compromised and get other people killed.  Fieldcraft skills are not something that are magically learned, but rather are gained through years of practice.  Although I do not expect a medic to be as capable at stalking an OP as a sniper is, I do need him/her to be savvy enough not to reveal the position of the patrol, to understand the importance of watching arcs and of never leaving anything behind when we leave the patrol base.  This is something that many young infanteers have a hard time learning.  It is that much harder when a medic has not done any such activity in 6 years before he is thrust into the breach.

When we can have such cooperation, the results are usually spectacular.  I have had the good fortune of working with fabulous medical personnel a few years ago.  I had the same medic attached to my coy for several exercises, some conducted in the US, winter exercises, etc.  He turned out to be one hard soldier and was more than willing to learn the infantryman skills required to defend himself and his patients in the field.  He volunteered to do individual and pairs live fires and turned out to be better than many of our finest soldiers.  As I said impressive.  Before anyone cries 'foul!' here, I would remind you that medical personnel in the field should be carrying weapons in the field for personal defense as well as protection of their casualties.  This is a provision of the Geneva Conventions.  However, I have never seen any other medic beside this one go around with a rifle.  Again, this is something that must be continuously practiced and improved.  

Cpl (Mcpl by now?) Comeau, wherever you are, you still have all my respect!


----------



## Armymedic

We (leaders of medical pers) have ack'ed that our medics are lacking fd skills and this is being addressed. One large problem is that this is being pushed by NCO (read Med Techs and PA's) but those in CFMG HQ  who make the tng decisions as to what to teach our baby medics are officers...A large disconnect that we are addressing. 

Trust me when I say that being an infantry company medic is the BEST job in the army, just like being a ships medic is to the navy. We are doing our best to keep our med techs as close to the front line down and dirty as we can.

Aid to the Warrior


----------



## Brad Sallows

>1 lack of man power 
>2 because of above reason medics are not always there when needed

When you lack enough of a critical resource, you concentrate and control it at the highest practical level.

1/pl plus 2 amb tms (either 2 or 3 pers each) is 7-9 medics/rifle coy.
3 coy + UMS (1 MO, 6 medics, 2 more amb tm) is 32-40/bn.
Give the armour (DFS) 2 tm/sqn + UMS = 23-31/regt.
Give the arty 1 tm/bty + UMS = 15-19/regt.
Give the svc bn UMS + 2 tm = 11-13/bn.

The brigade, then, for this idealized provision of support needs somewhere between 145-183 medical personnel integral to the non-medical units, 6 of whom are MOs.   Leaving aside the requirements of the next echelon (close support), how many medics are currently on strength in each fd amb?   Let me guess: there are not enough to go around, even after some frantic ATOF reshuffling (which would doubtless have medics relocating more frequently that many other trades).   Which manoeuvre or manoeuvre support platoons/troops do you want to trade in next to convert some PY to MOSID 7xx positions?

Note that for purposes of this particular sub-discussion it is completely irrelevant whether the medics are on the nominal [roll] of the supported units or the fd amb.

The pillaging was of course a plan on which the CLS signed off, and AFAIK the CF continues to have difficulty attracting medical professionals.   (Not all of the organizational restructure has been driven by issues at the bottom of the care hierarchy.)

My guess is that unless the CF figures out some way to bring in huge drafts of doctors, CF H Svcs Gp is going to have to come up with some innovative solutions involving relatively young NCMs with different professional qualifications.


----------



## Lance Wiebe

When did all of this change?

I know I've been out for a while, but the subject of the thread caught me by surprise.

At the Unit, we always had a Sgt Medic, plus four MCpl/Cpl medics.  Each Squadron had their own medic in the field, in garrison, they all worked together.  Each medic had their own amb (wheeled or tracked) plus their own dedicated driver.  Of course, sick parade was done in the Unit lines.

So, the reaon for "centralization" seems to be (I got this from this thread) a power grab from the Powers That Be, and not from a manpower shortage.  If this is the case, then something is drastically wrong.


----------



## HItorMiss

Wiebe: 

Though nominally each Coy has I believe 2 medics attached to it, the key word in that statement is nominal, more often then naught they simply are over tasked, on course etc etc and not available to the Coy's for every little training event, and many big ones too.


Though I agree that medics need to be at the UMS level, I actually tried to leave the UMS situation out of my thought process I believe now that this miss lead some people as to my train of thought, I want the current staffing of the UMS to remain on strength and be a Bn medical asset an in house movable field expedient hospital someplace that bridges the gap between field doctoring and the rear ech hospital.


----------



## HItorMiss

McG said:
			
		

> Does an infantry company require medics in garrison?   Would there be sufficient depth in a company for the medics to conduct ttheirown skills training & pprofessionaldevelopment?
> 
> The UMS is the lowest level the medics should be kept at.   From there, they can be tasked to support sub-unit training or operations as required.   They would also have depth to conduct thitheirn training (thus ensensuring even better quality of medic available).




Sorry but I whole disagree there, I fully believe that Medics need to be with the troops, sure they will go away on courses and such but the lack of personal interaction leaves many soldiers withought faith in the medical personal and system used to keep them alive and healthy, Yes keep the UMS
as a centralized medical clearing house for lack of a better word, where in garrison soldiers go for sick parade, but having that one Medic who stays with the Coy pers everyday trains with them does PT with them refrefersem to the UMS does all training events with them that will the medic that the troops trust and I would say would be the better more highly skilled Medic in the field to patch my Shot A** up when I as a Recce Ptrlmen take that round in the leg/arm/gut or whereever during a contact and also not be the lialiability said patrol


----------



## vr

A chicken in every pot...a medic on every recce patrol.  Here we go again, eh.

I do not personally know of any military force that carries out long range patrols (SAS,SF, Rangers) that use medical personnel on a routine basis.  They do train some of their troops to a very high trauma management standard a la TCCP and equipped accordingly.  What sort of high-speed medical kit is the Medic going to carry on a recce patrol that a TCCP qualified soldier can't use.  DF help me out.

Old adage:  You never have enough infantry, engineers, or medics.  Very true.  Trusting Brad Sallow's math as I always have you would need 143-183 medical personnel for the integral support of a bde group with equipment.  This is very close to the establishment of a Field Ambulance, probably much closer to the current numbers rather than doctrinal.  In essence we would have to double the size of each Bde group's medical establishment.  Including twice as many MO's/PA's!!!!  Unless the recruiting & training establishments wholly devote themselves to medics (not a bad thing) for the next few years or the CLS decides to re-role a cbt arms/svc bn as a medical unit this is not likely to be achieveable.  A medic in every platoon is doable for limited scope operations, ie Afghanistan but even that is proving difficult to sustain with current levels.  I believe that allocation of critical resources is a higher command function and medical personnel are a critical resource and central control is a necessity.  And like in any organization/corporation once you give them control over something you have to pry it from their cold dead fingers.

Since this debate has been/will be ongoing I believe that we need to separate the Reg & Reserve sides of it.  Since I have had limited exposure to RegF UMS's I will speak to what I know.  I would hope that other Reservists do the same.  Bringing all Reserve Medical personnel under the Medical Establishment is an absolute necessity for the viability (?survival) of the R end of the trade.

The Medic in a RegF UMS will have the opportunity to practice and develop their trade due to the size of the establishment they support and that they do it everyday.  They also work under the guidance of MOs/PAs with proper equipment available.  They support exercises and deployments of long duration often with medical scenarios/events written in.

The average Res Inf unit CPl Med A who spends their training nights updating the ADM Coy whiteboard or exercises as enemy force gets no chance to practice their trade.  What medical work they do is more often than not unsupervised by more experienced medical personnel.  Not only are mistakes made but mistakes become dogma.  Some units have taken to training night sick parades as a "make work" project.  This is silly: if you are too sick/injured to participate in a 3-hr trg night then you shouldn't be spreading your germs on public transit and are a hazard to yourself and others in traffic.  Furthermore unless they are directly working under an MO or PA they are not legally authorized to reccomend anything especially medications.

For reasons that have been posted in other forums and on other late and lamented boards it is necessary for Res Med A's to be part of the Medical establishment.  From what I have seen this has been done in an enlightened manner with the wishes of the med A's duly considered.  Besides in all my readings of QR&Os I have yet to find the phrase  "you have to like it".


----------



## pbi

While I know that my peers serving in the Field Force have their own serious misgivings about the directions taken by CFMS, my experience has been confined to the implementation of the changes as they related to the three Med Coys (and various unit med pers) that were organic to our Res Bde.

I have never, never, seen a more badly mismanaged force restructure issue in my life. Our Bde HQ was apparently the only one that spoke up, early on, about this clown act, earning us the undying enmity of certain power brokers in the CFMS world (esp the Res CFMS world....) Our attempts to make sense of the abysmally late, poorly thought out and utterly unrealistic staff work that emanated from that HQ consumed a disproportionate amount of my time as COS and that of our G1, as we attempted to ensure that our soldiers in the three Med Coys were not merely "abandoned" to this travesty. When we were finally able to get a staff team from the CFMS Res project to actually visit our HQ, it was immediately evident that they had little or no grasp on the reality of  running a Reserve unit, nor of the interrelation between a Res Med unit, its parent Bde or the other Res units around it.

I have seen nothing, nothing  that has come out of this schmozzle that could not have been achieved by more intelligent recruiting efforts, better training, and a reasonable acceptance of civilian qualifications. None of this required the nonsense, wasted staff effort and hoop-jumping that this "plan" entailed.

So, as you can see, I am a bit less than objective when it comes to this issue. No more stovepipes. Cheers.


----------



## Alex252

I think this would be a good idea. Although I dont have experience with any of this ill give my 2 cents worth. If youve got 2 medics who are you going to choose? The one youve been training with and you trust or the one youve never known? I'd personally chose the 1st one. Also some of the medics having combat arms knowledge would be a good thing. A little off topic here but can medics still not carry a weapon?


----------



## Fishbone Jones

Alex252 said:
			
		

> I think this would be a good idea. Although I dont have experience with any of this ill give my 2 cents worth. If youve got 2 medics who are you going to choose? The one youve been training with and you trust or the one youve never known? I'd personally chose the 1st one. Also some of the medics having combat arms knowledge would be a good thing. A little off topic here but can medics still not carry a weapon?



If I'm hurt, I don't care if I know the guy or not, I'll trust anyone willing to help me.

Medics carry weapons both for self and patient protection.


----------



## dutchie

I agree that there should be two different systems for res and reg medics.

In the res world, 'Units' don't deploy operationally, so having medics on strength is a waste, IMO. In the event of a domestic emergency, medics form the local med unit/Field Amb could either operate independently, have Med A's attached to the 'front end' units, or a combo of both (my preference). When was the last time an entire Res unit deployed Operationally? WW2? I don't believe that will ever happen again.....at least not in my lifetime. 

In the Reg world (in my limited experience), Med As are a necessity. Some train along side the Combat Arms troops, and are deployed with them (again, correct me if I'm wrong). Obviously Reg units DO get deployed as a complete unit, so keeping Medics in the unit is a considerable advantage.

The average Res Inf unit Cpl Med A who spends their training nights updating the ADM Coy whiteboard or exercises as enemy force gets no chance to practice their trade.   What medical work they do is more often than not unsupervised by more experienced medical personnel.   Not only are mistakes made but mistakes become dogma.

I couldn't agree more. It's unrealistic to expect a Cpl Med A to be able to self manage themself. We have Sr NCOs/WOs/Officers in every other area of the CF to ensure proper training and competant skills as per CF policy/regs. To remove this element and expect the Cpl to do it all alone, with the 'supervision' of the Infantry staff (for instance) is unrealistic and unfair to the Med A, not to mention totally unrealistic.

To sum up: 
1-Res Med As should not be attached/with other-trade units.
2-Reg non-Med units should have a full complement of medics attached to them.


----------



## PRL ER NO

Good Day to all;

As a former infantrier, in the Res F, and a member of the "enemy", the CFHS now.   Just off course this summer and, I think, up on Medical Doctrine.   The role of "embed medics" in front line field units, ie platoons and/or troops, in this day and age in the CF is a miss management of resources.   In the days as an infantrier with the greatest threat being the "Red Hoard" Europe and not global terrorism, the only Res Cpl, if we were lucky, Med A was attached to our Plt Wpns Det under the direction of the Plt WO.   The only time we would see the Med A was for sick parade in the morning and at foot inspection after a long march.   As a Section Commander, I felt that having or not having that person, the Med A made a difference in the way we "fought".   Also, in my time with the Reg F, in theatre, Cyprus, I never saw a medic in the platoon, not was one attached to the Company Camp.

As for Doctrine, does a few of you forget that, as Recceguy stated, Med A's only carry weapons, light rifles and such, for the protection of self and their causalities.   According to their Geneva Convention rights, they can not engage it the battle or "win the fire fight" and still have the protect of the Red Cross. 

So does it really matter if the attached Med A trains with the field unit, as long as they, the field unit and the Med A, do their jobs to win the battle and that the powers that be allow for more soldiers to fight the battle.

My "2 Cents"


----------



## pbi

I'd like to make a few responses, based on my own experience as well as what I see going on in the world today.



			
				PRL ER NO said:
			
		

> Good Day to all;
> 
> As a former infantrier, in the Res F, and a member of the "enemy", the CFHS now.
> 
> *I don't think that anybody is suggesting that the average MA is "the enemy". That title belongs to others.*
> 
> Just off course this summer and, I think, up on Medical Doctrine.
> 
> _*And naturally full of enthusiasm for your new trade. However, be careful that a head stuffed full of "doctrine" on a course retains room for the reality of operational experience*. _
> 
> The role of "embed medics" in front line field units, ie platoons and/or troops, in this day and age in the CF is a miss management of resources.
> 
> *This is obviously the "party line" of some people in CFMS: it serves well to justify the empire building that they have been engaging in. Anybody who truly believes that having an MA in a platoon is a waste of resources is more worried about CFHS org charts and turf-control than the lives of soldiers.*
> 
> In the days as an infantrier with the greatest threat being the "Red Hoard" Europe and not global terrorism, the only Res Cpl, if we were lucky, Med A was attached to our Plt Wpns Det under the direction of the Plt WO.
> 
> _*OK---so what does this have to do with attaching MAs directly to rifle platoons engaged in live operations?   And anyway, what is wrong with having the Pl WO control the MA, since cas are the WO's task in battle?*_
> 
> The only time we would see the Med A was for sick parade in the morning and at foot inspection after a long march.
> 
> 
> _*I repeat my question from above. Just because you saw what you thought was mismanagement does not make it so, nor does it undo the experience of a lot of other people*._
> 
> As a Section Commander, I felt that having or not having that person, the Med A made a difference in the way we "fought".
> 
> *This must be a typo because it doesn't appear to support your argument: you seem to be agreeing with "embeds".*
> 
> Also, in my time with the Reg F, in theatre, Cyprus, I never saw a medic in the platoon, not was one attached to the Company Camp.
> 
> *Please: do not judge current operational needs by what happened in Cyprus. I served there in 1991-Canada left there in 1993. Cyprus, except a few short periods around 74/75, was better known as "CFB Nicosia" and in its later days was organized as much for administrative convenience as operational capability. For most of its duration it was a very low-risk mission (no disrespect to those who actually lost their lives in action, but they were in a tiny minority...). The ops we go on now are totally different, much more high risk, and have little or no relation to what was done for most of the time we were in Cyprus.  *
> 
> As for Doctrine, does a few of you forget that, as Recceguy stated, Med A's only carry weapons, light rifles and such, for the protection of self and their causalities.   According to their Geneva Convention rights, they can not engage it the battle or "win the fire fight" and still have the protect of the Red Cross.
> 
> _*I'm not an expert on the Geneva Convention, but I believe the idea of giving medics weapons is to "defend" their patients and themselves, right? Well, as far as I know, "defend" means "stop the enemy by use of lethal force", not "fire two rounds and run away". If you have to defend your patients, you better be able to win the firefight. And since when does legitimate self defence waive the protection of the Red Cross (assuming, by the way, that the people shooting at you either know or care what the Red Cross is....)*_
> 
> So does it really matter if the attached Med A trains with the field unit, as long as they, the field unit and the Med A, do their jobs to win the battle and that the powers that be allow for more soldiers to fight the battle.
> 
> _*Do some time on   modern ops and we'll talk. Sorry to be rude, but you just don't have perspective to make a statement like that. Wait till you see a guy blown almost in half by a mine and tell me we don't need medics in platoons. There's a big bad world out there, beyond CFHS's "doctrine" books. Cheers*._


----------



## Infanteer

> Well, as far as I know, "defend" means "stop the enemy by use of lethal force", not "fire two rounds and run away".



Unless your in the French Army.

Bu-du-boop....

Sorry, couldn't resist.

Good post PBI.  Interesting to see the different perspectives between "actual command" and ""stovepipe control".

The nemesis of stovepiping seems to go beyond our Combat Arms shoptalk.

Ok, I'm leaving now....


----------



## combat_medic

_This is obviously the "party line" of some people in CFMS: it serves well to justify the empire building that they have been engaging in. Anybody who truly believes that having an MA in a platoon is a waste of resources is more worried about CFHS org charts and turf-control than the lives of soldiers._

I think this sums up very nicely what's been going on.


----------



## Armymedic

Lets end the talk of empire building by CF H Svc Gp (proper name).

I have questions that with some thought should close this discussion...

ref to reg force only:
1. how many rifle platoons are there in the army?

2. how many armoured squadrons?

3. how many engineer squadrons?

4. how many artillery batteries?

5. how many medics are in the UMS (C/S 83) for each of those units

6. name all those other units in a brigade that get 2 or more medics attached?

So how many medics is that?        now should we talk about navy, air force and all those other DND tasks like CFS Alert, and recruiting centers who need medics?



So why is a medic not attached to an infantry platoon?


----------



## pbi

> So why is a medic not attached to an infantry platoon?



I don't know why we don't have medics attached to infantry rifle platoons for ops and for training, which is what I'm talking about, not putting medics permanently into the establishment of a rifle platoon.  They should be in Med Pl as part of Admin Coy. I bet you will find that medics in Inf Bns do a lot more "doctoring" and alot less floor sweeping than the medics over in the Field Amb. Cheers.


----------



## combat_medic

While I can't speak from personal experience, I know that when I was in Borden on my MA QL4s, there was a reg force 5s running at the same time, and right next door. Many had been trained privates for the duration of a contract or more, and almost none had ever actually worked on a patient or been overseas. They spent years driving trucks, folding mod tents, repairing vehicles, and doing endless excercises and simulations, but never applying their trade, despite there being enormous demand. So why not attach these medics to the Inf/Cbt Arms Coys? Surely their time would be far better spent, and their training time more valuable treating casualties than driving trucks for 3 years. Also, it would certainly help alleviate the overburdening of the QL5 MAs who are being overstretched both at home and in terms of operational tempo.


----------



## Armymedic

pbi said:
			
		

> So why is a medic not attached to an infantry platoon?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I don't know why we don't have medics attached to infantry rifle platoons for ops and for training, which is what I'm talking about, not putting medics permanently into the establishment of a rifle platoon. They should be in Med Pl as part of Admin Coy. I bet you will find that medics in Inf Bns do a lot more "doctoring" and alot less floor sweeping than the medics over in the Field Amb. Cheers.
Click to expand...


Exactly. Each are tasked to a coy by the UMS IC, and there tasked to a platoon or a task by the CSM. Further in answering my previous post, there just isn't enough medics, not enough qualified, not enough fit, and sadly, not enough willing to undertake the demand being an infantry medic requires of you. In 3 RCR alone, there are 9 rifle platoons, a recce platoon and DFS platoon. Thats 11 medics, Sgt and blow just for 4/5 ths f the unit. Then you need a MO, PA, and 2-3 Medics for the UMS. Thats 15 pers. 10 yrs ago, not a prob, but at this tiem we just don't have enough qualified (QL5 and up) med techs to go around.  Also if you have 10 excellent medics, not all 10 can be put in the same unit. Generally the powers will spread them around to encourage professional development.

That QL 3 's do nothing but fold canvas and maintain trucks is changing, albeit slowly. Not that having them do that is a bad thing...I'll get to that in a bit...

First line medical support, more specifically in the army context, as a infantry company medic is the "pinnacle" may I say, of being a medic.

Seeing there is no hockey on TV, let me use a hockey analogy:

Consider working in a UMS as the big leagues, the NHL so to speak. To play in the NHL, you need the right combinations of speed talent and experience to be successfull. Evey player goes thru a development phase thru major junior and affiliate (Farm) teams building the skills needed to play. If you did not spend enough time developing your skills, then your owners may send you down to the Farm team to improve your skills. Once you have improved your skills and gained more experience then you may be brought up to the big leagues again. Also due to shortages (injuries in hockey, deployments in the reg f) you may be temporally brought up to fill the gap when better players are gone.

This is not much different from the way a fd amb works. Ptes need to be familiar with maint on our vehs, know how to put up canvas, be intimately familiar with the panniers, so that when they come to a UMS to work, those basic skills (like skating and shooting in hockey) are second nature and do not need to be taught or learnt. Also, to work in a UMS you HAVE to be comms and dvr wheeled qualified as a absolute min. 

So, anyone who complains about doing their job....is always free to go find another.

Sounds like those ptes you talked to either are not good enough to move up or don't have the initiative in their leadership to get them into the UMS to gain experience for a short time. Obviously they like the paycheck, as they are still in.


----------



## pbi

I may be getting a bit misunderstood here, as you are stridently driving home the point about how many medics we need in an Inf bn versus how many we actually have. I get that part. I don't dispute, for one second, that we need more MCpl/Cpl MAs, with the best possible training, to fill these holes and give us this capability which I as an Inf officer (and as a former commander of  a platoon of medics as part of Admin Coy) believe 100% that we need. 

What I dispute, and I have disputed all along, was the manner in which it was tackled. Cheers.


----------



## Armymedic

Yes Sir, I see you point...

Just because 1,2 or 5 Fd Amb have 50 medics running around, and the UMS are short, does not mean the fd amb is hording resourses. It is likely because they are new and it takes 2-4 yrs to qualify and give experience to a medic to become a good UMS medic.


----------



## pbi

Armymedic said:
			
		

> Yes Sir, I see you point...
> 
> Just because 1,2 or 5 Fd Amb have 50 medics running around, and the UMS are short, does not mean the fd amb is hording resourses. It is likely because they are new and it takes 2-4 yrs to qualify and give experience to a medic to become a good UMS medic.



I understand that too: having done some time in Admin Coy I appreciate that the support trades keep the newbies inside "the mother ship" of the Fd Amb or Svc Bn until they are at a sufficient skill level to join the CSS element of a Cbt A unit: I have no quarrel with that, at all. We benefit by receiving a higher quality of support soldier, and the CSS trades are able to work on the technical qualification of their people.

My issue is with stovepiping by building yet another empire. We did it for the MPs, we seem to be about to do it for CSS, and we have done it for Medics. A military force as small an under-resourced as ours is cannot tolerate all these stovepipes. We need unity of command, not fragmentation. In my perfect world, the Army would own all its supporting branches, lock stock and barrel. Cheers.


----------



## combat_medic

So then why is it that QL3 MAs who are now all qualified paramedics, and who, if they were employed civvie side, would be in an ambulance working with patients right away, cannot be employed in a UMS? Is there really value to giving someone a PCP course, plus a few more months of the QL3, and letting their skills rust for 2-4 years because the Fd Amb feels that folding canvas is an excellent way to develop medical skills? These people have the training - certainly as much or more than a QL4 qualified reservist, who can take taskings in an MIR. Can't this sea of trained privates be used to plug the gaps in the UMSs?


----------



## Armymedic

Mel,
They won't just be folding canvas et all, but doing ride alongs with civ amb services, doing maint of comp tng at the local unit or Valcartier, covering brigade level tasks, needle DAGs, ranges, ATC courses, etc, and one or two to fill gaps in the UMS, but that is still only after being dvr and comms qualified.

The reason Pte medics cannot work in a UMS is that thier level of skill and training is lacking in two critical areas....Assessment skills and supplying of OTC medication. Any QL 3 Pte even PCP qualified has to have direct and constant supervision by a MCpl when seeing patients in a first line "walk in clinic" role. Even then I have to Rx the OTC and give the medically imposed restrictions as they are not allowed to do that.


----------



## medicineman

An addendum to ArmyMedic - QL3's also cannot dispose of patients (ie give them time off/LD, etc).  Like he said, there is a lack of training vis a vis screenings and also experience - it takes time to get comfortable knowing what you can "sit on" in the field or on operations and what really needs to be seen right away and therefore taking the soldier AND the medic out of the line.  And since they can't give out anything, literally every sick parade that comes through the amb/slit trench/hooch would have to go back to the UMS for disposal.  Want to drive your CSM or platoon Warrant insane - that will do it.

Have a great Army Day.

MM


----------



## combat_medic

So then how is it that a reservist Cpl with less time in and equivalent training or less to a QL3 Reg Force Pte is able to do all those things when in an MIR tasking? I've done them myself in an MIR setting, and I know that the QL3 Reg Force, even before the PCP addition was longer than my 3s and 4s put together.


----------



## Armymedic

Supervision? or lack of it?

No one ever said the way we/they did stuff before was right. Heck I used to Rx Antibiotics etc, until the new guidelines came out....


----------



## Infanteer

This is a question because I am quite unfamiliar with the details of the Medical Branch.



			
				medicineman said:
			
		

> An addendum to ArmyMedic - QL3's also cannot dispose of patients (ie give them time off/LD, etc).



Is this really required of a "field medic".  I'm talking about sending guys to patch up people in the middle of a firefight.  The US were able to do it in Vietnam.  Perhaps there is need to separate "field medic" and "hospital medic up into two different trades?
 ???


----------



## Armymedic

The equivilent response in 031 context would be:

why does every riflrman need to learn to shoot machineguns? That could be two different trades...

No, they are both skill sets reqd to gain experience before moving on to bigger and more complex things at higher ranks.


----------



## Infanteer

Armymedic said:
			
		

> why does every rifleman need to learn to shoot machineguns? That could be two different trades...



Funny, the Americans do that with sub-MOS's.... 8)

Perhaps, instead of relying on the pers strapped Medical Branch, which has it own problems, the Infantry (or the Combat Arms in general) needs to expand it's "in house" low-gear First Aid.  Like I've mentioned before, I watched the Brits do it and it seemed to work fine.  It would treat "Field Medic" as a specialty function - like "Machinegunner" or "LAV Driver".


----------



## starlight_745

It is difficult to separate the two skill sets.  The whole concept of field medical support ranges from minor complaints to sick parade to treating those wounded by enemy action.  It would be very difficult to have two MOC's providing this care.  I remember reading somewhere that during WWI there were 30 times more casualties from disease than enemy action.  I agree that the infantry combat medical care skill set should be improved, hopefully the new Combat First Responder course will fill that void.


----------



## old medic

That reminds me of the old terms "stretcher-bearer" or "cas-aid"....

QL3's should not be giving time off, light duty, etc.   Regardless of what we were doing a few years ago.
Medics need to be accountable up the medical chain.

As for the comment about PRes Pte/CPl's doing it, I have to agree with Armymedic. That was then.


----------



## PRL ER NO

It is nice to see the combat arms soldiers thinking.  The use of "combat first aid responders" is an idea.  However, to remind you, the goal of the enemy is to limit the number of fighters, for example, every wonder why most antipersonal mines only blow off a foot, it takes two soldiers to remove one injuried from the battle field thus limiting the fighting soldiers in the battle.  The combat first aid responders if "embedded" in the fighting group should not be included in the total number of soldiers, ie a section of 8 with 2 first aiders.

I do agree that the first aid skill set should be improved and self aid and buddy aid promoted.  

I find it odd that all of your examples have related to other countries armies.  Their doctrine is different that ours and their set up is also different.  If you combat arms soldiers want embed medics in your units, maybe think of solutions that work with in the Canada army and work with what we have.  I don't like it, but we have to live with it.


----------



## Infanteer

PRL ER NO said:
			
		

> It is nice to see the combat arms soldiers thinking.   The use of "combat first aid responders" is an idea.   However, to remind you, the goal of the enemy is to limit the number of fighters, for example, every wonder why most antipersonal mines only blow off a foot, it takes two soldiers to remove one injuried from the battle field thus limiting the fighting soldiers in the battle.   The combat first aid responders if "embedded" in the fighting group should not be included in the total number of soldiers, ie a section of 8 with 2 first aiders.



I was proposing that the infantry be alloted a "hard position" of platoon medic - since the Medical Corps cannot or is unwilling to fill the position, we should use an Infantryman with a suitable amount of training as a medic.  It need not "siphon" troops from rifleman positions.



> I do agree that the first aid skill set should be improved and self aid and buddy aid promoted.



Yup, and by the sounds of things, we're getting better at it.  At least it appears we are moving beyond the "your co-worker falls off a ladder" scenario.



> I find it odd that all of your examples have related to other countries armies.   Their doctrine is different that ours and their set up is also different.   If you combat arms soldiers want embed medics in your units, maybe think of solutions that work with in the Canada army and work with what we have.   I don't like it, but we have to live with it.



Sometimes it pays to look at others are doing, especially when their armies have far more real world experience in sustained combat operations.  For us to ignore what the Brits and Americans have learned in three years of fighting for the sake of looking for a "Canadian" solution would be foolhardy.


----------



## Armymedic

Infanteer,
I believe we are on the same net but talking different languages...



> Is this really required of a "field medic".  I'm talking about sending guys to patch up people in the middle of a firefight.  The US were able to do it in Vietnam.



I think what you are referring to is a 031 qualified as a Combat Lifesaver (US Army), or Tactical Combat Cas Care (the full US SOF course not the Canadian version). These are those pers in a firefight who would do just basic patch, scoop and run with strictly acutely injured casualties and bring them to the CCP or evac them via veh or helo to a med facility. They do not replace properly trained medical pers, but supplement them. Every Sect could have a CLS qual pte, Cpl, taught as part of a QL 4 course.

You'll still need the 1-3 Med techs per Coy, Sqn, Bty.


----------



## medicineman

Infanteer said:
			
		

> This is a question because I am quite unfamiliar with the details of the Medical Branch.
> 
> Is this really required of a "field medic".   I'm talking about sending guys to patch up people in the middle of a firefight.   The US were able to do it in Vietnam.   Perhaps there is need to separate "field medic" and "hospital medic up into two different trades?
> ???


Infanteer,
     The primary health care skills are required of a field medic in a platoon.  The vast majority of what you deal with on a day to day basis is illness or minor injuries.  Speaking for myself, when I was a baby QL5 in Croatia, about 95% of my day to day work was run of the mill sick parade, about 3% minor traumas, and the rest the really scary stuff.  No change when I was in Kabul last year or Haiti this year - actually even less scary stuff.  As per normal, disease and minor injuries accounted for more time lost than operational injuries.
     The medics in Vietnam had to look after the day to day needs of their troops the same way,  whether in their slit trench UAS or in a clinic when back in Battalion lines.  The training received by the Navy guys with the Marines tended to be somewhat better than the Army guys - the Navy corpsmen had better clinical training early, since they could easily find themselves alone or nearly so on a ship somewhere, and then did their field medical training at the Fleet Marine Force Field Medical Schools if they were going to a unit.  Clinical training with the Army folks tended to be either on the job or as formal schooling after their combat medic course - but again had to be done in one way or another.
     Incidentally, this issue of splitting the trade into field and clinical subsets or seperate MOC's came up in the mid 80's - we are still awaiting the results of the survey.

MM


----------

