# Help debunking or providing details (UK first responders questions)
**URL:** https://boards.straightdope.com/t/help-debunking-or-providing-details-uk-first-responders-questions/616846
**Category:** Factual Questions
**Created:** [March 26, 2012, 2:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/help-debunking-or-providing-details-uk-first-responders-questions/616846 "2012-03-26T14:48:10Z")
**Posts on this page:** 12
**Page:** 1
### Author:  [@XT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/XT)
#### Post date: [March 26, 2012, 2:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/help-debunking-or-providing-details-uk-first-responders-questions/616846/1 "2012-03-26T14:48:10Z")
So, I received an email from a friend today titled ‘Sovereign Man, Notes from the Field’ by Simon Black. In in it there were a variety of stories about UK first responders that seem…well, a bit implausible, at least if they are supposed to be examples of every day occurrences in the UK and not one off fuckups. Here is what was sent to me (I’m cutting out some of the political bits, but cutting and pasting as it was sent to me…I assume it was cut and pasted from SovereignMan, which I presume is a blog or website of some kind):
> [@](#):
>
> Within five minutes, emergency crews began arriving. Then more. Then more. 36-minutes after the initial phone call, no fewer than 25 emergency workers were at the scene. They brought out a state of the art emergency medical tent, resuscitation equipment, several fire engines, ambulances, and specialty dive gear.
>
> For more than thirty minutes, emergency crews set up a complex operations center. Fire fighters positioned their trucks. Police officers cordoned off the area for crowd control. Water Support Unit officers donned protective gear and checked the pond for underwater hazards.
>
> Yet with all of this commotion, nobody bothered to fetch Mr. Burgess. For 36-minutes, he floated in the center of the pond, face down, while dozens of first responders scurried about with their ‘make work’ projects.
>
> Why? Because they hadn’t been ‘trained and certified’ by their various government agencies to enter water that was more than ankle deep. According to the UK’s Daily Mail,
>
> “When a policeman decided to go in anyway, he was ordered not to. A paramedic was also told not to enter the water because he didn’t have the right “protective” clothing and might be in breach of the Personal Protective Equipment at Work Regulations 1992.”
>
> And so, the emergency crews stood by waiting until a specialty team arrived, donned protective gear, and waded into the waist-deep water (at maximum depth) to retrieve Mr. Burgess. Needless to say, doctors formally pronounced him dead by the time his body arrived to the hospital, roughly 90-minutes after he fell in the lake.
>
> Following public outcry over how Britain’s impotent bureaucracy could manage to cost a man his life, the government held a formal investigation into the matter a few weeks ago. As expected, public service workers and politicians closed ranks, defending their decisions on the ground and claiming that they were only ‘doing their jobs’ and following the rules.
>
> It’s certainly not the first time this has happened. Last year, a 14-year old girl in London collapsed while in the middle of a cross-country competition. It took emergency workers 30-minutes to arrive, at which point they refused to carry her body through the muddy park to the ambulance as it was against health and safety regulations.
>
> Then there was the case of 44-year old Alison Hume in Scotland; she had fallen into a mine shaft and was trapped there for six hours suffering from hypothermia because emergency service supervisors claimed that using their winch to retrieve her would be a violation of regulations.
>
> Or the case of 10-year old Jordon Lyon of northern England, who was drowning in a local pond when two police officers arrived to the scene… and did absolutely nothing because they weren’t properly trained. Apparently you have to be trained by the government in order to jump in the water and save a drowning child.
>
> The public outcry in each of these (and similar) incidents more often than not results in a call for more regulation. This is such a typical government reaction-- the solution to a problem created by too much regulation is more regulation. It’s the only thing these people know how to do.
>
> These examples focus on the United Kingdom… but the issue exists around the world. Common sense and human decency are becoming increasingly sidelined to what the regulation says. Any good people in the rank and file are being crushed by an amoral bureaucracy.
What I’m looking for here is some details. Did the above happen? Is it an example of how things actually are wrt fire and rescue in the UK these days? Or, if they did happen, was it merely and example of one off fuckup-ery on the part of those who responded? I mean, shit happens, and sometimes folks screw up.
-XT
---
### Author:  [@Ludovic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ludovic)
#### Post date: [March 26, 2012, 3:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/help-debunking-or-providing-details-uk-first-responders-questions/616846/2 "2012-03-26T15:10:49Z")
> [@xtisme](#):
>
> ‘Sovereign Man, Notes from the Field’
You actually read further than the title? I assume out of sheer amusement?
---
### Author:  [@md2000](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/md2000)
#### Post date: [March 26, 2012, 3:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/help-debunking-or-providing-details-uk-first-responders-questions/616846/3 "2012-03-26T15:17:31Z")
Sounds more like typical rant stuff, but…
> **[Emergency services 'do anything to avoid putting themselves at risk'](https://www.dailymail.co.uk/columnists/article-483513/Emergency-services-avoid-putting-risk.html)**
>
> Did you happen to assume, by any strange chance, that the purpose of the emergency services was to rescue people in an emergency from the prospect of death or injury? Indeed. So did we all
[http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/7006412.stm](http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/7006412.stm) - this suggests Jordon was already gone/submerged when the police arrived; do you expect ordinary uniformed policeman to wade in and look for a submerged body in a small lake (as opposed to rescuing someone thrashing in the water?)
[Simon Burgess drowned after firemen refused to wade in 3ft deep lake due to health and safety rules | Daily Mail Online](http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2104358/Simon-Burgess-drowned-firemen-refused-wade-3ft-deep-lake-health-safety-rules.html) - this says there were no signs of life; also mentions further down the page that the reason the girl was not moved was because the ground was too slippery; presumably the risk of dropping a dangerously injured patient down a hill might be balanced with the risk of not moving her.
So what I see is that the situations seem absurd in hindsight, but at the time, there were somewhat legitimate reasons for not acting.
I know when I have taken first aid and safety-rescue training (not for professionals) they warn you to be safe first - many deaths, especially drowning or falling through the ice, occur when the person who jumps in to help becomes a victim themselves. Jordon, for example, jumped in to help his sister who was recued by other bystanders. It is even more absurd to die trying to recover an already dead body.
While children in very cold water may revive after a long time (IIRC the record is half an hour?) in general, once a person has been under a few minutes, it’s a body recovery situation.
---
### Author:  [@Baron\_Greenback](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Baron_Greenback)
#### Post date: [March 26, 2012, 3:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/help-debunking-or-providing-details-uk-first-responders-questions/616846/4 "2012-03-26T15:23:01Z")
I remember that the Alison Hume and Jordon Lyon cases, perhaps because they are so rare, but more likely because they were used by certain newspapers _ahem the Daily Mail_ as a stick to beat the drum of “Health and Safety gone Mad”.
Here’s more about Alison Hume:
[http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/crime-courts/fire-chief-defends-rescue-failures-1.1017112](http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/crime-courts/fire-chief-defends-rescue-failures-1.1017112)
This article is reporting the inquest into her death. Contrary to the material you quote in the OP, a paramedic and a fireman made it down into the collapsed mineshaft but were unable to do much until a civilian specialist rescue unit could get there.
Here’s more about Jordon Lyon:
> **[BBC NEWS | UK | England | Manchester | PCSOs 'did not watch boy drown'](http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/7007081.stm)**
>
> Community support officers "did not stand by and watch" a 10-year-old boy drown, a police chief said.
The two bystanders were not actually full police officers, but Police Community Support Officers (basically three weeks training, here’s a uniform, go and cycle the streets being impotent - no power of arrest or anything like that). You can read the rest in the link. Seems the debate is about whether officers should be required to jump into a lake, and search around to try and find a person who is not visible on the surface.
There’s not much of anything to go on about the other two cases, just a surname and unnamed 14-year-old.
A pinch of salt required I feel.
---
### Author:  [@Gary\_T](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gary_T)
#### Post date: [March 26, 2012, 3:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/help-debunking-or-providing-details-uk-first-responders-questions/616846/5 "2012-03-26T15:27:09Z")
Searching on _burgess emergency pond_ brings up several accounts. [This one](http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2106423/Simon-Burgess-body-floats-Walpole-Park-pond-emergency-workers-stand-watch.html) notes that after being advised the victim had been in the water for close to ten minutes, an official decided “that as there is no visible sign of life, this is a ‘body retrieval’ exercise rather than a rescue.” This may have been a poor assessment, as it seems to show ignorance of the [mammalian diving relflex](http://www.familydoctormag.com/first-aid-and-safety/1399-the-mammalian-diving-reflex-how-people-live-after-drowning.html), but given that assessment it is perhaps unfair to blame the following delays for costing the man’s life. I think one could more accurately call into question the aforesaid assessment (which is a matter of proper competence/knowledge rather than beaurocratic roadblocks) or even that bystanders on the scene did not attempt to reach the body right away.
Similarly, searching on _alison hume_ and _jordon lyon_ will bring up articles on those incidents, from which you can gather more complete information.
---
### Author:  [@glee](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/glee)
#### Post date: [March 26, 2012, 3:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/help-debunking-or-providing-details-uk-first-responders-questions/616846/6 "2012-03-26T15:32:52Z")
The Daily Mail is a pathetic ‘newspaper’ that relies entirely on the following:
- stories that alarm its readers (SOMETHING MUST BE DONE!)
- stories about the Royal family (especially Diana)
- stories about immigrants and travellers
- stories about victims of crime (especially pensioners)
They would go crazy if an immigrant traveller could be implicated in Diana’s death. :smack:
Here’s an example of the quality of their ‘research’ (bolding mine):
Actress Dame Judi Dench has hit out at today’s culture of health and safety that has seen **traditional childhood games like conkers banned in schools**.
[usual Daily Mail crap](http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1235023/Judi-Dench-I-furious-conkers-banned-schools.html)
it turns out that:
- conkers has not been banned in any school
- neither have any other childhood games
- **one Headmistress** told pupils to wear goggles when playing conkers
---
### Author:  [@Gary\_T](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gary_T)
#### Post date: [March 26, 2012, 3:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/help-debunking-or-providing-details-uk-first-responders-questions/616846/7 "2012-03-26T15:44:25Z")
Searching on _14-year old girl in London collapsed while in the middle of a cross-country competition_ brings up [this article](http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-2072144/Paramedic-refuses-carry-dying-girl-14-collapsed-cross-country-run-medic-bad-back.html?ito=feeds-newsxml) (yep, the good old Daily Mail). The top blue bar in IE combined with the URL seem to say the paramedic refused to carry her because he had a bad back, but I don’t see that idea addressed anywhere in the article. It does point out that the ambulance had trouble finding the exact location and then was prevented from getting close to her by fencing and gates. What I’m seeing, both in the article and Black’s blog, is a tendency to use sensationalist comments while leaving out part of the story.
---
### Author:  [@EmAnJ](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/EmAnJ)
#### Post date: [March 26, 2012, 3:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/help-debunking-or-providing-details-uk-first-responders-questions/616846/8 "2012-03-26T15:54:27Z")
> [@Gary\_T](#):
>
> Searching on _burgess emergency pond_ brings up several accounts. [This one](http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2106423/Simon-Burgess-body-floats-Walpole-Park-pond-emergency-workers-stand-watch.html) notes that after being advised the victim had been in the water for close to ten minutes, an official decided “that as there is no visible sign of life, this is a ‘body retrieval’ exercise rather than a rescue.” This may have been a poor assessment, as it seems to show ignorance of the [mammalian diving relflex](http://www.familydoctormag.com/first-aid-and-safety/1399-the-mammalian-diving-reflex-how-people-live-after-drowning.html), but given that assessment it is perhaps unfair to blame the following delays for costing the man’s life. I think one could more accurately call into question the aforesaid assessment (which is a matter of proper competence/knowledge rather than beaurocratic roadblocks) or even that bystanders on the scene did not attempt to reach the body right away.
>
> Similarly, searching on _alison hume_ and _jordon lyon_ will bring up articles on those incidents, from which you can gather more complete information.
Yes, it is suprising that this was labelled a recovery after only 10 minutes! The protocol here (in Canada) is 90 minutes - up to and before 90 minutes, it’s a rescue. Afterwards, it’s recovery. Many, many people survive after 10 minutes or more under water.
---
### Author:  [@XT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/XT)
#### Post date: [March 26, 2012, 4:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/help-debunking-or-providing-details-uk-first-responders-questions/616846/9 "2012-03-26T16:19:39Z")
[QUOTE=Ludovic]
You actually read further than the title? I assume out of sheer amusement?
[/QUOTE]
I like to be able to rebut emails like this, or to argue/discuss them when people send them to me. Generally, I look on Snopes or similar sites, but I’m in transit today so I figured I’d ask here to see if any UK dopers had any first hand knowledge/ammunition about the email. Seems a good call, since a lot of 'dopers DO seem pretty good at tracking this stuff down.
Also, like with the 9/11 CT threads, it’s good to get this information out there, even if in this case it’s a bit silly. It shows how stories can be twisted first by a sensationalist media and then by someone looking to make some political point (presumably, Sovereign Man is trying to make some point about socialist institutions in the UK, or about bureaucracy and how it’s stifling individual response under the weight of a system that doesn’t want to take any risks…or something).
Thanks to everyone! Appreciate the facts on this.
-XT
---
### Author:  [@newme](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/newme)
#### Post date: [March 26, 2012, 4:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/help-debunking-or-providing-details-uk-first-responders-questions/616846/10 "2012-03-26T16:33:48Z")
This reminds me of the first (and last) episode of Baywatch I ever saw. Someone goes under at the beach. The Baywatch crew pull him out within minutes. They try CPR for about 30 seconds, then give up. I thought then that no emergency team could be this incompetent. I guess I was wrong.
---
### Author:  [@isaiahrobinson](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/isaiahrobinson)
#### Post date: [March 26, 2012, 5:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/help-debunking-or-providing-details-uk-first-responders-questions/616846/11 "2012-03-26T17:11:35Z")
[QUOTE=xtisme]
According to the UK’s Daily Mail…
[/QUOTE]
There’s your problem. 🙂
---
### Author:  [@Mangetout](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mangetout)
#### Post date: [March 26, 2012, 7:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/help-debunking-or-providing-details-uk-first-responders-questions/616846/12 "2012-03-26T19:55:44Z")
> [@newme](#):
>
> I thought then that no emergency team could be this incompetent. I guess I was wrong.
Did you read any part of the thread?