–
The 40-year-old paramedic was working near Rockhampton where he stole methoxyflurane – a non-opioid alternative to morphine often used for acute trauma – from the Queensland Ambulance Service in November 2010.
QAS suspended him a month later and court documents show he was convicted in Brisbane Magistrates Court after pleading guilty to “stealing as a servant” in April last year, receiving a $500 fine and five days’ imprisonment.
Documents obtained by The Courier-Mail under Right to Information laws show he received a subsequent “formal reprimand” and demotion last June.[1]
FireGeezer writes –
This recent disclosure has political groups, labor organizations and government officials in conniptions over why this convicted drug thief was allowed to keep his job. The Queensland Ambulance Service is keeping mum about it though (so far).[2]
But nobody provides any details that would provide the kind of information that would be important in deciding if the decision by Queensland Ambulance Service is appropriate.
The medic has been demoted, which is not a minor penalty. He has also paid a fine and spent 5 days in prison. What are the rules for handling this? Nobody will say.
–
Queensland Corrective Services Commissioner Marlene Morison said there was “zero tolerance for staff convicted of an indictable criminal offence”.[1]
We definitely do not want to have zero tolerance.
Zero tolerance forbids any kind of thought.
Do we really want administrators to be prevented from thinking? My complaints about administrators are usually about administrators not thinking enough. Discouraging thinking even more is a horrible idea. The only zero tolerance we should have is for zero tolerance rules.
–
Has the paramedic been demoted to a position where he would no longer have access to methoxyflurane?
Was the paramedic abusing methoxyflurane?
Nowhere in the article does it provide any evidence that there was any drug abuse, but it does suggest that taking the drug was for abuse. We should not be judging based on ignorance, but that is what we are being encouraged to do.
Ignorance is Strength![3]
–
I am not familiar with methoxyflurane (MOF – MethOxyFlurane – brand name Penthrox), but I did find an article that provides a lot of good information about the medication for those outside of Australia. Go read the whole article.
Concerns about abuse are very real with any controlled substance. We asked if there are any actual or potential abuse issues with MOF. MOF and Entonox are controlled substances and must be accounted for in a drug register. Unfortunately, in the past, there has been some abuse by providers. Stricter controls on storage and accounting for the drugs have made it much more difficult to obtain them.[4]
Of course, we do not even know if there was any abuse. The article is about a political battle, more than anything to do with patient care.
Politics?
Ignorance is Strength![3]
Zero tolerance is self-imposed ignorance.
–
Footnotes:
–
[1] Ambulance officer’s job safe despite stealing conviction
by: Alison Sandy
The Courier-Mail
January 25, 2012 12:00AM
Article
–
[2] Paramedic Steals Drugs, Goes to Jail, Keeps Job
FireGeezer
January 24, 2012
Article
–
[3] 1984
George Orwell
© 1949
–
[4] Surviving The Pain of Injury on ‘Survivor’
Colleen M Hayes, MBA, RN, EMT-P
emsvillage.com
Article
.
While you’re on the topic of Methoxyflurane, I wouldn’t mind seeing some typical RM research about the actual drug…
given that on road here everyone seems to be either on the “it’s a wonder drug that fixes all pain and does nothing bad” or the “oh noes if i smell any of it it’s going to shrivel my kidneys” ends of the spectrum (and apparently it doesn’t have an FDA approval in the USA, even though our TGA is more than happy with it)
(oh, and I’ve only seen it abbreviated “MXF”, not “MOF”.)
@JB : Registration with the United States FDA was voluntarily withdrawn by the manufacturer of a similar product called Penthrane.
It was listed in many parts of the world for use as a general anaesthetic in much higher doses than what is currently produced for analgesic purposes.
The nephrotoxicity issue was a focal point of the FDA and has been scientifically proven to be dose related. It is simply not possible to reproduce the same nephrotoxic effects in the current manufacturer’s recommended dosages.
The TGA conducted a very in depth review of the Penthrox safety profile following FDA withdrawl. Amongst other reasons, there has NEVER been a significant adverse event reported to the TGA which can be directly attributed to Penthrox and thus it has since maintained it’s regulatory approval.
The content of Colleen Hays article is interesting, especially the reference points which she has used and the underlying theme that there so many clinicians which have issues with occupational exposure.
What she fails to mention is the multiple independent confined area exposure studies which have been conducted specific to Penthrox and the results which have always shown exposure limits to be acceptable.
Colleen’s article is not well researched and relies heavily on personal opinions as opposed to the vast body of evidence which exists not only for methoxyflurane in general but specifically the product marketed as Penthrox.
I started as a pre-hospital care provider in Australia over 20 years ago and have personally administered thousands of Penthrox doses. Granted, not every analgesia is effective in every patient however, in the vast majority of patients I have treated, it has been quite effective.