embed the medics right into the Coy's

[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.

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]

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.

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]

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.

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]

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".