Fundies and CPR

[Knight of Ni]

I took CPR, first aid, and AED training earlier this week. One of the other students in the class asked a question during the AED portion about what to do when you're putting an AED on a woman. The question was what to do with the woman's bra. The answer was to take it off, modesty doesn't matter when you're saving someone's life. That made me think about what a fundie would think in a situation where it would be necessary to give CPR or AED. When giving CPR you have to touch someone's chest and God forbid you have to touch their mouth with yours. Would a fundie refuse to learn or give CPR because of this?

I have this thought that if a young woman was in need of an AED, her fundie mother or father would refuse to let them be helped because they don't want their daughter "violated". It simply wouldn't be modest to allow someone to see her like that. Would they really let their ideals get in the way of saving a life?

[Sunnichick31]

Of course they let their ideals get in the way of saving lives. They would rather a woman die from pregnancy complications than allow her to get an abortion.

[Imora]

Any fundies around who can answer that one??

[QuoVadis]

I took CPR, first aid, and AED training earlier this week. One of the other students in the class asked a question during the AED portion about what to do when you're putting an AED on a woman. The question was what to do with the woman's bra. The answer was to take it off, modesty doesn't matter when you're saving someone's life. That made me think about what a fundie would think in a situation where it would be necessary to give CPR or AED. When giving CPR you have to touch someone's chest and God forbid you have to touch their mouth with yours. Would a fundie refuse to learn or give CPR because of this?

I have this thought that if a young woman was in need of an AED, her fundie mother or father would refuse to let them be helped because they don't want their daughter "violated". It simply wouldn't be modest to allow someone to see her like that. Would they really let their ideals get in the way of saving a life?

Hi, Knight of Ni,

I know this is a snark board, but sometimes I have a hard time separating the snark from serious inquiries which do arise. If this is a serious question...I am a fundie (probably would be classified as 'fundie lite' here); several fundie girls I know work as nurses' aids and so have to bathe (naked) people of both sexes. For myself, I know how to give CPR; I also know six fundie doctors (three men, three women all of whom are graduates of LCME-accredited schools), who all regularly perform similar and other more "personally invasive" procedures. Among my acquaintances in fundie circles (we'll put the estimate at 250 people or so), I do not know of anyone who would refuse CPR. In answer to possibly arising allegations of double standards, I will only comment that the purposes of male and female modesty in my circles are generally honoring God, politeness to others, presentation of oneself, and prevention of unnecessary display of erogenous zones to those that don't have a right to see them. In a medical situation, there are not the same boundaries, expectations, or liabilities and license is thus given.

If it's snark only....my apologies. In that case, of course, no decent fundie would allow any form of CPR, any medical care, any possibility of even a woman's fingernail showing. We must be covered head to toe in blackest sack-cloth. Slits for the eyes, even, are dangerous - as you know how promiscuous a woman's eyes can be. If an AED should be used, it must be done by an administrator of the same sex, done in a dark room but in the presence of six witnesses of the same sex, and there must be six layers of clothing on the sufferer. I'm pretty sure the reference for this is Hezekiah 13:2, but only in the KJV edition.

[Beammeup]

When EMT's are called to the scene of someone so sick they need an AED, they pretty much shove everyone out of the way and do it. You get sued for NOT performing things, not FOR performing them. EMT's also usually give some modesty just by their bodies and equipment being around the patient. Others on the scene, fire fighters or police officers, DO try to shoo people away or block the crowd to protect patient privacy. I can definitely see fundies worrying about modesty when they should be worrying about saving their daughter.

My grandparents (very strict LDS) did object once when I got heat stroke at a competition. My grandfather protested mightily when the EMT sliced off my inner leotard (not my performance costume that had already been removed). My memory is they cut off the leotard and tights, and had a hospital gown on me in seconds. I remember feeling so much better not in the tight confines of my leotard. What they should have been worried about was that I was getting an IV inserted. An IV with a bag of Ice taped around it. People focus on stupid when there is something traumatic and dangerous going on.

[reckoner]

When EMT's are called to the scene of someone so sick they need an AED, they pretty much shove everyone out of the way and do it. You get sued for NOT performing things, not FOR performing them. EMT's also usually give some modesty just by their bodies and equipment being around the patient. Others on the scene, fire fighters or police officers, DO try to shoo people away or block the crowd to protect patient privacy. I can definitely see fundies worrying about modesty when they should be worrying about saving their daughter.

I might be wrong, but I think if you're not an EMT and just a person who has CPR/first aid training, you can get sued if you do it against the person's wishes/without consent (if they can give it). At least, if I recall correctly from when I was trained, if a child is in danger, you have to ask the parents if it's ok for you to help before you do anything (if the parents are there). I'd like to think a fundie parent wouldn't put their child at risk by denying them help, but I could see them potentially getting in the way. And I wouldn't be surprised if a CPR trained fundie would be hesitant to help someone of the opposite sex (or same sex even? Wouldn't want to seem gay). I'm purely speculating though and I'm definitely biased against them lol.

[wtfrenchtoast]

That's actually a really interesting question. I'm sure there are some fundies who haven't gone that far off the deep end, ilke QuoVadis up there, that they would let themselves or their children die for the sake of modesty. I'm sure there are some that would though. At another forum I read at, there was an epic 600+ post thread regarding the sinfulness of male gynecologists. So I feel like it can go either way.

[sassycupcake]

The Duggar rule seems to be that in a medical situation, everything is fair game. Giving birth? Go ahead and get naked from the waist down in front of the male camera crew! Giving birth on a toilet? Even better for the ratings!

[gezykah]

I might be wrong, but I think if you're not an EMT and just a person who has CPR/first aid training, you can get sued if you do it against the person's wishes/without consent (if they can give it). At least, if I recall correctly from when I was trained, if a child is in danger, you have to ask the parents if it's ok for you to help before you do anything (if the parents are there). I'd like to think a fundie parent wouldn't put their child at risk by denying them help, but I could see them potentially getting in the way. And I wouldn't be surprised if a CPR trained fundie would be hesitant to help someone of the opposite sex (or same sex even? Wouldn't want to seem gay). I'm purely speculating though and I'm definitely biased against them lol.

When I was trained in CPR about ten years ago we were told the laws vary greatly depending on the state. Our trainer said in Massachusetts as long as you're not doing something outside of your training you can't be sued. So even if we cracked somebody's ribs while performing CPR, which can happen when performed correctly, we couldn't be sued. If one of us attempted to perform a tracheotomy then we could get into serious trouble since we were never trained to do that. He noted that he thought people were more open to lawsuits in Rhode Island but he wasn't certain. This lead to a pretty interesting discussion in the class about fear of getting involved in a crisis due to potential legal issues.

[maybeizfundie]

I am not aware of anyone in the pretty wide variety of fundies that I know who would refuse CPR or other medical care on the basis of "modesty." I can think of a good number of of situations where health and life trumped modesty preferences. Modesty doesn't really go out the window. An emergent medical situation is an emergent medical situation, there is no time for sexual thoughts. Even a friend of mine in a very conservative Brethren sect went along with what was necessary when she had non-Hodgekins lymphoma. She may have felt uncomfortable and exposed in hospital gowns and not wearing her headcovering (not to mention losing her hair, which according to church rules isn't to be cut) but she got treatment and was not hindered or despised by her family or her church, but rather strongly supported.

My husband comes from a nation that would be pretty extreme to Americans in terms of modesty and touch. IE: Even married couples rarely if ever touch in public. He's a health professional, knows CPR, and would not hesitate to apply that knowledge for *anyone*, male or female. Nor would he want me or his daughter to be kept from lifesaving care out of some weird idea of modesty. He can differentiate between sexual touch and medical treatment. I'm sure most others can.

I see this as somewhat different from choosing a medical provider based on modesty "issues" in a non-emergent situation. I wouldn't refuse care from a male doctor. I don't think it's evil or immoral to see a male doctor. I go with female doctors and midwives whenever possible. Personality, background, personal history, etc play a part in that. That's my preference. In the event of an emergency, life trumps preference.

[MrsKay]

I seem to recall a device that can be used for mouth-to-mouth, that places a barrier between the rescuer and rescuee. Not that I'd bother with it if I had to give CPR, but I swear I've seen it. I bet fundies keep one in the first aid kits.

[MrsKay]

Yay, I'm not losing my mind just yet! Here is a selection fundies would appreciate.

http://www.cpr-savers.com/Industrials/Cpr%20prod/Faceshield/faceshield.html

[Conuly]

Actually, those face shields seem like a sensible idea if they work to reduce the spread of disease. It's unusual to see that spelling of mannequin, though. (Not wrong, just unusual.)

Although you'd think that saving lives would be paramount to most people, religious or other (assuming they don't reject all medical treatment out of hand), I know that under the Taliban it was pretty hard for women to get medical treatment at all for just this reason, because they couldn't be seen by male doctors. Which is pretty fucked up all around, but I wouldn't be surprised if there are other groups with that viewpoint.

[MrsKay]

If I had one, and had to perform CPR, I imagine I'd use it. But if I did not have one, well, I'd just go ahead and get cooties. I can imagine some fundies backing away in horror and letting someone die simply for want of a face shield.

[GiGi_41]

I have a face shield for CPR...a lot of times people vomit when you are doing CPR, it has a one way valve so fluids don't come up into the mask.

[DistantStar]

I had CPR training something like six or seven years ago, and while I don't remember anything specific about laws, I do know I wouldn't want to do it without a face shield though if there were no choice I would -- but otherwise modesty be damned. I know what breasts look like, I have a pair myself, and a bra would be in the way. And I was told flat-out "broken ribs heal." CPR done properly will probably break them. Better than the alternative; at least if somebody can do CPR or can use an AED, that gives them a chance. Though I would want a refresher course on CPR, I know there's been some major changes in the recommendations for regular people doing CPR.

There are times when modesty doesn't matter. If you're in bad enough shape that EMTs are removing your clothing, I hope to God that would count. Even for fundies wouldn't life count more than physical modesty? It's not like medical personnel are perving, they're trying to save your life!

[Deleted07]

For some reason I can remember an episode where some of The Duggar older children learned CPR, I am guessing to do with the emergency response team thing they were involved in? I seem to remember Jana being over a CPR Dummy.

[Beammeup]

Yay, I'm not losing my mind just yet! Here is a selection fundies would appreciate.

http://www.cpr-savers.com/Industrials/Cpr%20prod/Faceshield/faceshield.html

Face shields aren't for modesty purposes, they are for hygiene/sanitation purposes. See when someone needs mouth to mouth, they often puke, hence the wonderful invention of one way valves. There are also a myriad of diseases that these devices help prevent the transfer of. These masks also very much help create a good seal by covering the nose etc. A good seal is essential for successful assisted breathing, but is VERY hard to get with just one mouth working at it. It's not like kissing someone who kisses you back. Its like trying to kiss someone who just lays there with their mouth gaping open.

CPR is best done latex gloves to skin. Anything in the way causes big problems.

Good Samaritan laws exist in most (all?) states in the US to my understanding.

[mpheels]

Good Samaritan laws exist in most (all?) states in the US to my understanding.

I was just getting ready to post that. I don't know every law in every jurisdiction, but in the US at least, civilians are pretty well protected from lawsuit if they provide assistance during an emergency.

Also, the guidelines for CPR (in the US) changed a couple of years ago. The recommendations now call for chest compression only unless the person performing CPR is specifically trained for rescue breathing and has a CPR mask. In most cases it is more important to keep the blood moving that to get more oxygen in, and there is evidence that compressions alone may be better than compression plus breathing. Public health officials also believe more people will be willing to help in emergencies when they only have to do compressions. There were some other significant changes in CPR/First Aid released that the same time. If it's been more than 2 years since your training, it's worth getting a refresher.

[sableduck]

It's been my experience(as a paramedic) that in a CPR situation, NOBODY cares about exposure. Yes, we try to limit people watching, but that isn't really a modesty thing, it is for the privacy of the patient and/or family. CPR is a brutal, brutal thing. Ribs break. We are shoving a breathing tube down the throat, we are putting IVs in or IO's--large, large IVs that get drilled into the leg with what looks like a drill gun. The victim has often vomited and/or pissed/shit on themselves. We don't want friends and family to have those brutal, disgusting final pictures of their loved on in their head(despite what you see on TV, CPR very rarely actually brings someone back. In five years, I've never had a save; my husband has had one).

Also, nobody is doing mouth to mouth. Non-medical people are doing CPR only; trained EMTs, paramedics and first responders are using other equipment to force air into the lungs.

I work in an area with a lot of fundies, both extreme Baptist types and Amish/Mennonite. I've never had anyone object to exposure or touching in a medical emergency. That said, we do try to be respectful of people's beliefs and people's discomfort with exposure and limit it as much as possible.

[Trynn]

As an EMT student, I remember being told that that the only time we did not do CPR is if the patient had a DNR. And even then, we had to have it IN OUR HAND. My teacher talked about a time when the relatives said the guy had a DNR, but after they rescucitated him and took him to the hospital, found out that that was not the case. (A DNR is a Do Not Rescucitate order, which is written and signed by a doctor, usually in the cases of terminally ill patients.)

I don't think we ever discussed parental refusal with CPR. We did discuss it with other situations. I can't remember all of what was said, but in a life threatening situation, I know consent was assumed if we couldn't get ahold of the parent. Not sure what the protocol was if the parent refused care in a life threatening situation... I do know the teacher said that at that point, she looked for signs that the parent was drunk, because if he was drunk or otherwise impaired, he couldn't give consent, and therefore consent was assumed. I cannot imagine a parent refusing to give a child care in a life threatening situation.

[mockingbird]

On another thread, I think I remember BRADRICK letting Kelly get hurt b/c he couldn't touch her? Maybe while they were courting?

I hope this wouldn't be an issue, and I don't think it would be for even most fundies.

[sableduck]

The protocol for parental consent is, if the child is in a life-threatning situation and the parent is refusing treatment, to have the police take care of it. They are often right there on scene or shortly behind you, and if a child is going to be seriously ill or injured or dead because the parent was refusing treatment, someone is probably getting arrested on child neglect. And then you can do what you need to do.

I've never seen it happen though.

[B5SnowDog]

(despite what you see on TV, CPR very rarely actually brings someone back. In five years, I've never had a save; my husband has had one).

I'm sorry, sableduck. My dad's a volunteer firefighter and has done CPR twice. Neither person made it.

[dawbs]

we've actually had this come up in chem labs where I work...

These are college students, and the discussion of how to help someone disrobe so they aren't permanently scarred, while under the safety showers was a discussion worth having; some of our students who head-cover for various reasons didn't like the idea that, if they dumped a beaker of HCl on themselves, someone may help them strip.

Our 'policy', actually, is that their 'lab buddy' helps them strip and 2 people are assigned to be 'blanket holders' (to hold up the fire blanket as a privacy curtain) while the room is evacuated of non-necessary personnel.

(luckily, it hasn't had to be tested yet. I mean, we do 'dry runs' of what should happen--minus the complete disrobing and the pulling of the shower cord [only pull those with a 'boot' under them--they are designed to flood the room!], but what happens when there's a *real* accident is sometimes different--we've had one [very minor] one in the years I've worked here.)