edit3: Burtletoy came up with a really good idea of an after school, voluntary course. I like it so much I'm going to adjust the whole thread to be based on it because damn that's a good idea.
I think the below 3 reasons still stand except the 2nd one since it's a voluntary course now. I'll edit the op to make it more clear but for now just think voluntary instead of compulsory.
Reasons for:
1). It's a basic, positive skill. I can't think of a good reason why it shouldn't be taught to at least year ten's onwards.
2). It'd be damn good to have everybody you know basic first aid as a core skillset. Education is supposed to give you life skillsets and I really don't think some of the more abstract conventional topics is more important than knowing basic steps to save someones life. Anyway you could just slot it into physical education.
3. You need to be taught it to do it properly. You can't really pick it up on your own.
I was wondering if there are any schools which teach this and if there are any philisophical considerations as to why this couldn't be slotted into, say, compulsory physical education? A little bit of first aid drills every week for a number of years would firmly lodge the skills into every persons head.
edit: Update to op. I didn't make this clear but the core idea wasn't really a short course or something to assume the child knows. I was more thinking of a one hour repeated drill every week for a few years, and weighing up the costs/benefits/issues of such a thing in this thread. Sorry I have no idea why I didn't say that in the op originally instead of just sort of throwing it in at the end like it's an after thought. I feel silly now.
edit2: I'm not interested in discussing a short course taught to children once in this thread. That is already done in a lot of schools and really wouldn't have a lot of benefit. Scalfin asked if I meant including it in the "main curriculum" below and while I'm not sure if he and I mean the same thing I think this is what I am speaking of. Including it as the default curriculum that needs to have time and attention put to it of at least one hour every week.
(PSN: Morninglord) (Steam: Morninglord) (WiiU: Morninglord22) I like to record and toss up a lot of random gaming videos
here.
Posts
I was a certified CPR card carrying guy, and I had no fucking idea how to do it. It was kinda scary.
I wasn't taught this in the public school I went to.
Just once off teaching people isn't really enough you'd kind of need to drill it just like other things they teach you.
Off the top of my head, giving bad first aid because you're supposed to know how to do it can be more harmful than not giving first aid at all and I'm not sure i want a child making that decision. It would still probably have a net positive, but legal(are there any?) and psychological consequences for a minor giving first aid should be accounted for.
Nope.
The first answer is a good point.
The second answer is worthless, expand on it please. You know how to read and write, these are knowledge skills...
We spend like a week or two on it, but we would all just sit and fuck around while the teacher was watching one person d it, then by the time he got to us to watch us we would set the piece of paper with the instructions down right next to the dummy and read what to do while taking our certification test.
Like I said, if it was a real situation all I'd know is where to push on their stomach and to breath into their mouths.
Not the numbers, not if it was actually helping the person, not the difference between recessitation vs. emergency breathing.
I didn't know shit and was certified for it.
Definitely not what I'm talking about. Kids will do that for anything after all. A week is a shit amount of time. They might as well have not bothered to be honest.
You're not supposed to breathe in their mouths anymore. Apparently, it only gives marginal benefits in cases where it is appropriate but is quite harmful in similar-looking cases where it isn't.
Reading and writing are skills you use everyday. Do you remember how to resolve 2nd order differential equations? You don't? It's entirely possible that CPR seems like a differential equation to a 11 year old, only with more responsibility. I've had CPR courses(mandatory with the driving license). I'm pretty sure I couldn't revive a carrot and there is a severe chance that my knowledge of how to bandage an arm is a fast way to amputation.(before you quote that, see: hyperbole).
There will be children that would never learn to give first aid(as there are adults). There will be children who'll simply forget 90% of what they learned two days later.
That's not evidence for why first aid drilling every week wouldn't be remembered.
Yes. They're skills you use every day. Differential equations are something you get taught over a couple of weeks, tested on, then generally forgotten about. But I bet you do know how to do basic mathematics. And I bet you don't do that every day.
I still know how to write an essay because they made you do one every few weeks.
This is why I don't mean just throwing it into them for one week and assuming they know. A drill is a repetition of a skill designed to let you remember because you keep doing it.
Because they stop drilling when they, I don't know, graduate?
I covered this point.
You'd forget a lot of it, but memory doesn't just completely go for a procedural skill.
Also do you remember how to ride a bike Scalfin? When was the last time you did that.
You can teach these skills in a similar manner.
If you keep getting tested on first aid after graduation, you need to change your neighborhood.
Edit: Yeah, you put first aid into the general knowledge bowl and I gladly disagree and put it in the specific knowledge bowl. You have to make an informed decision about somebody's health and make an attempt to save their life. Sorry, could never be general for me.
Bike riding is a different type of memory, as illustrated by the fact that it can't be lost to amnesia.
I know how to write because I do a lot of it here (and I kind of make up all structure outside of intro-content-end s I go along)
No it's the skills to save their life I'm talking about, not the information on when to do it. That's not really something you need to worry about. It will be fucking obvious. Is this person not breathing. Do they have a pulse. Well call the emergency services then and in the meantime what do I do?
It teaches you how to check for these, and then what to do about them. The movements you need to do are body movements. If you drill them enough they will fall into procedural memory tied to the cerebellum, same as bike riding. It's not an abstract knowledge skill if you practice it physically, so it doesn't fall under the same processes as the types of knowledge which require you to sit in a chair and do all the thinking in your head.
Scalfin: No it's not. It's just body movement memory. Drilling will make the skills I'm talking about, eg what you have to physically do to the person, the same as bike riding. You can make things into this type of memory and that's what I'm suggesting. Come on man this is obvious! You remember to bike ride because you made your body do it! Make the kids repeat the movements properly and they learn it. How are these two situations fundamentally different?
You know they put what I'm talking about in phone books here, but you need to practise it to get it down when it counts you can't be looking at the paper.
Would it, though? Like what if all you can remember for how to give an emergency tracheotomy is "jam pen in throat" but you can't remember where so you just end up stabbing the person in the throat randomly. That's not exactly helpful.
You're forgetting the most important step: diagnoses. This is, as I mentioned, why you're not supposed to perform mouth-to-mouth anymore. I mean, this could work as a main curriculum subject, but short of that we'd be in deep shit even discounting the people with out-of-date information.
Are not equal.
No I acknowledged the point of diagnoses and changing information. I'd appreciate some discussion of how that would be resolved.
I'm discounting the point of they'll just forget it.
They're separate points.
I'm not arguing to preserve my great idea or shit like that, I'm trying to acknowledge each point as it comes up because I want to consider all the options and then discuss them. Scalfin you are kind of dismissing the entire idea as worthless to think about, or at least that is how it comes across, but some of your arguments for it aren't valid, and some are. That's how I see it.
@Burtletoy: I already said such a short course is not what I'm talking about. Nobody would remember such a short course.
We might also be considering different budgets. You seem to want to go all out, and I tend to think in terms of moderation when it comes to budgets.
I was just making the point to Underdog that some small amounts or remembered First Aid from a class is not necessarily better than knowing nothing.
I totally agree with you that when I was taught some first aid it was pointless.
Yeah I am. I kind of want to weigh the cost of some of the more abstract skills we get taught that are included in a budget compared to this. I'm not sure why this shouldn't be included in a main curriculum. It seems like it's a pretty vital skill to have at least every kid do it once a week for an hour for a few years. How much would that take away from another subject is something I'm happy to discuss, I don't know much about how these systems work.
@Burtletoy: Ah I understand, no worries.
Normaly people wouldn't stab in that case then. We're talking about people that can freeze up during a test situation because they're not sure about an answer. I think that when the consequences are pushed up from "possibly failing course" to "possibly killing someone" that stabs in the dark wouldn't really be a problem.
Partial first aid knowledge wouldn't give a person a doctor's mentality of thinking he can save anyone from anything, especially if he can't remember half of his first aid training. It might however make them remember that someone who might've had some neck trauma should not be moved. Or that someone who suffers a concussion should not be allowed to go to sleep. Or that someone who's fallen into freezing water needs to have the wet clothes removed. Just general things that I assume first aid covers.
But those are all things you know right the fuck now. Have you ever taken a first aid class?
Most of that seems pretty reasonably considered general knowledge and not something really worth taking the time away from classes meant to teach you thing that you won't learn from watching drama movies.
You could reenact a little bit of the accident so they know what would trigger the appropriate information.
Of course that made me realise you'd need to do that very carefully so they don't leave with the impression they should hit someone in the head then not let them go to sleep... :P
I'm 23, of course I know those things now. But I didn't know them when I was 12. I picked most of it up from movies and books. Hell, that concussion thing I didn't learn until a few year ago from the movies.
I'm not arguing the main point of "should it be taught or not", I'm arguing against the idea that "half remembered knowledge is useless" point. I might not be able to pass a test on quadratic equations but I can still provide some help (sometimes a lot, sometimes very little) to my younger cousins with their homework. Knowledge is never useless, even if you can't recall the entirety of it.
I want to just clarify this: are you talking about the short course burtletoy mentioned or the one hour per week long term drill I am talking about?
Because I really don't agree with you on that short course.
If your cousin is trying to solve quadratic equations and you remembered 'something' from a math class you took ten years ago and you end up giving him the equation for the volume of a sphere, did you actually help him?
If I tried to CPR someone, until about 15 min ago, it would've included breathing into the person which I now know can actually do more harm than likely good in similar looking situations.
Yes, strawman, but still...
What if it was a longer course, but you still only remembered half of the ideas presented?
You could still do more harm than good. If you only want to limit the discussion to "If you were taught a class and remembered everything perfectly forever" than, I guess you can, but it seems like a bit of a stretch to say that about any classes given in lower education.
I already addressed that. If I wasn't sure, I'd say "I think it's this. Try it. Oh, didn't work? Ha, shit I can't remember then, sorry." But I HAVE remembered stuff before so yes, I have been useful for them in the past. I've also been wrong and math being math, it became clear. If I wasn't sure about cpr procedures, I (and most people) wouldn't go through with them. If I was aware that a pen needed to be stabbed into someone's throat to let them breathe but I wasn't sure where or how far, then I wouldn't do it, which is what I assume would also be most people's reactions.
Look I'm not arguing for OR against first aid in schools. It's just that on the first page someone said "Ok well kids wouldn't be able to remember anything about it anyway so why teach it?" and I felt it was a bullshit argument. If remembering something in its entirety was the qualifier for something be worthwhile to teach, well then I wouldn't have been taught anything. I routinely only remember chunks of things because I'm not a computer but I don't consider incomplete sections of knowledge to be a waste of time.
edit: trimmed the quote tree, was getting kinda long
Drill is repetition.
Think...typewriting class. Or a fire drill.
And no I don't want to limit it to that. I'm willing to consider that, as I keep repeating.
I also want to know more about this more harm than good argument. It seems like a worthwhile argument to think more about.
Exactly what do you mean by more harm than good? Could you give examples?
So your suggestion is a full semester or a multi-semester course?
I would be wholly opposed to it for two reasons:
a) Not enough material. The reason CPR and First-Aid seminars and the like are short is because a layman (i.e. not a medical technician or doctor) should only try so much. CPR, Heimlich Maneuver, defibrilation, emergency tracheotomy, etc. I really would not feel comfortable with people thinking they could perform more than that and I'm leery about the emergency trach, too.
b) The fact that there is only so much material to cover means the training would be diluted if spread out to six or more months, which brings about all the problems people have mentioned here. Maybe I'm just cynical but students are lazy. It's potentially dangerous to give a bunch of students that may or may not have paid attention the idea that they are empowered to save lives. If you do things the wrong way you CAN harm or kill the person you are trying to save.
Personally, I don't think there's any good reason for an academic course on First-Aid, and a vocational would have to be short to be effective.
And there's another reason, no matter the length of the course:
c) I don't think we should force people to feel medically responsible for other people. I think this sort of thing should be voluntary only.
I think it's a reference to Drez's situation of an emergency tracheotomy, where there's a block in the throat and so a tube needs to be inserted to circumvent the block and allow breathing. What if you're working on half remembered knowledge and you end up killing the dude because you stabbed him in the wrong place? Well that's asinine. In a situation where being wrong means someone DIES, natural doubt (especially when a person knows they don't remember the whole procedure) sets in and they'd step back and not try some half assed attempt at it. Or am I wrong in this? Would most people just forge on ahead, even given their uncertainty?
The argument is bullshit because then first aid courses in general could be seen as a detriment. Adults can forget things just as readily as kids can. And yet there doesn't seem to be an epidemic of people who've completed first aid courses being sued because they caused more harm then good. So why isn't there strict regulations on people who've completed those courses? Why don't they have to check in every few months and take a practical test, just to prove they won't be killing people with half remembered crap? I think it's because the vast majority of people who voluntarily choose to take those courses aren't morons.
First off: One hour a week. This is the core idea. So kind of a mini course really.
And only basic cpr not any kind of medical procedure you need to have ambulance training for and definitely not something like an emergency tracheotomy.
a). You are still thinking of teach once assume they learn. I mean to repeat the practical elements enough that they are drilled into their heads. So repetition. This might not even require a whole hour, you could probably put this into a part of another course.
b). They would have to repeat these instructions. So rather than an entire first aid course they would learn some key practical skills. These skills need to be carefully evaluated as to whether they should be included. So a customised program would be a good way to put it.
c). This is a good point. I'm not sure how I feel about that and it opens up a big ethical and moral can of worms. I'm willing to discuss it but I need more time to think about my stance on it.
You're alone with your best friend. It's just the two of you, your friend starts choking, Heimlich doesn't work, no phone reception, nowhere near civilization, and you're a bit fuzzy on where the trach is. What do you do? Sit there and watch your friend die, or try to save your friend?
You're trying to apply rational, calm thought to a potential emergency situation. I'm sorry, but until you are actually IN an emergency situation like that - until you are presented with exactly that kind of dilemma - you cannot state with all certainty how even you would act. I don't know how *I* would act. I might do nothing out of fear of harming my friend. Or I might see it as hopeless if I don't. I won't know unless the situation ever pops up and I hope to GOD it never does.
That sounds far-fetched, but really that's the exact kind of situation where a non-EMT would have to do something of this nature. The whole point of first-aid is for it to apply to an emergency situation.
So I really don't think my points are absurd in the slightest.
I'm not really sure where cpr could be dangerous if they're also taught to look for a pulse, for example.
I know I'm supposed to push somewhere on their torso to get them breathing *push* whoops I broke three ribs
And I'll agree with Drez. I don't want someone that was forced to learn CPR against their will to necessarily be the one preforming CPR. If you want to save someones life, there is a good chance that you will take it upon yourself, during your own free time, to learn these kinds of courses.
Math, English, Science, and to a degree Art, take more presidence for me in an Acedemic institution.
This is more of an after school program to those who are inclined to learn it.