This community is a place created for the people of Melbourne and Victoria. We are a positive, welcoming and inclusive community. We might not agree about everything, but we always strive to stay civil and respectful.
The focus of our discussions is based around things that effect Victoria, but we are also free to discuss our local perspective on wider issues. Or head to the regular Daily Random Discussion thread to talk about anything.
Ongoing discussions, FAQs & Resources (still under construction)
Adoption Certificate for Nellie, the Daily Thread numbat (with thanks to @Catfish)
I’m all for hating the cops but that’s a bit of a misleading headline.
The court heard police handcuffed Mr Winmar and placed him in the recovery position before calling an ambulance.
The request was cancelled when he came to.
A short time later Mr Winmar again lost consciousness and stopped breathing, as police requested another ambulance and did CPR until paramedics arrived.
That just seems like an appropriate first-aid response to me?
First aid is just that. The first step to proper aid. Surely if he’s unconscious and an ambulance is deemed appropriate, he needs medical attention, even if he comes to. Cancelling an emergency ambulance may be appropriate, but no medical care may not be.
Cancelling the ambulance was not appropriate
And does it say he was denied further medical attention after cancelling the ambulance?
No, not that I saw. Nor does it say it was provided.
No it's not. People don't generally lose consciousness, so even if they regain it, they should still be escalated to advanced care to be clinically assessed.
I'm still wondering whether an unconscious racial bias might have impacted their decision to cancel the ambulance?
