Why are 999 call handlers like this?

[NotADailyMailJournalist]

Hello

I came across a man collapsed and bleeding heavily from a head wound in the street today. Literally a thick puddle of blood. I slammed a folded, fabric shopping bag on the wound to stem the bleeding.

Me: Hello, I've found a collapsed male, conscious but with heavy bleeding
Call Handler: what age is he? Do you know his name? Did you see him fall?
Me: 60-ish maybe, not sure on name, Davie he says, maybe, no I didn't see it happen. Is the ambulance on its way?
Call Handler: YOU NEED TO ANSWER THE QUESTIONS, LISTEN TO ME! Further questions about when did this happen etc etc.
Me: he's very distressed, can I tell him the ambulance is coming?
Call Handler: FINALLY says ambulance is on way.

Speaking to friends, they say this is common. Why can't the call handler just say "it's ok, ambulance is on way, answer these questions in the meantime"?

Thanks

I assume they can't dispatch the ambulance until the questions have been answered. They need to know whether to send a full crew or the single paramedic on a motorbike or whatever.

Because they need to grade the ambulance dispatches.

I don't know why they're like this op but my experience was the same. My dad was dead for a week when we found him, I rang 999 as I was borderline hysterical and didn't know what else to do. The woman answered and said what's wrong and I said my dad is dead, she said is he breathing and I said no as he is definitely dead, been dead for a few days and she said can you check to see if he is alive. I started screaming some gibberish at that point. Would be interesting if someone could shed some light.

There’s probably a script. They have to get all the information entered before they can send an ambulance.

They can't just take a person's word for it though, as some people may be in a coma for example.

So sorry this happened to you, almost exactly the same thing happened to my DH when he found his father dead.

Because the answers to your questions will dictate if they send an ambulance and what priority response the ambulance (or paramedic or mental health team etc) they send.
Just because you phone and say you want an ambulance doesn't mean you'll necessarily get one. They need to assess first.

I had a similar experience trying to get them to confirm an ambulance was on its way.

I told them exactly what had happened and when she started reeling off questions I asked several times over if the ambulance as going to be sent. She started asking me to be with the patient (they were indoors and I couldn't go in) and when i tried to explain I am autistic and cannot do things but please can you tell me the ambulance is coming she got really rude with me. It made an already traumatic experience much worse. I will always be frightened to call 999 now because of how she treated me. It was a 15 minute phone call and we were about 7/8 minutes in, with me having a panic attack on the phone before she confirmed the ambulance would be sent.

By the time the ambulance got there they actually sent one paramedic to the patient and the other one stayed outside with me because I was in such a state I needed help myself. Had I been told the ambulance was coming right at the start, I may not have got so worked up. I was terrified.

Yes they have to use the information to grade the dispatch in terms of emergency.

So for example "Baby not breathing and turning blue", would be further up the priority list than "Man breathing, saying his name but lying in a pool of blood".

But I've already said "collapsed, conscious, heavy bleeding from head wound". How does knowing his name and age and whether I saw him fall relate to whether to send an ambulance or not or what priority it's given?

I feel the caller and the victim would be much calmer if they were even just told "we're getting you help".

Saying his name and age means he is conscious, breathing and hasn't lost his memory.

If you saw him fall, the call handler would be more likely to be able to ascertain if there were other injuries, such as internal.

This is information they need to prioritise the dispatch, over someone (for example) who has collapsed with a heart attack and receiving CPR somewhere.

I agree that they could handle eliciting the information in a more compassionate and reassuring way. In some cases with a greater sense of urgency.

We saw someone being attacked outside a petrol station and phoned for the police.

They were asking me all kinds of questions very aggressively, some of which much I couldn’t answer because it was a town I was just visiting and didn’t know.

In the meantime the poor bloke is on the ground getting his head kicked in by a couple of guys.

I've had to ring 999 a lot in previous employment. They are quite abrupt and they will interrupt you, especially at the beginning of the conversation. They shouldn't be outright rude, but I generally found the conversations pretty brusque. They do have to prioritise getting information out of you over reassurance, which can make it seem a bit snappy.

Sounds like a stressful experience for you.

They're brusque because the early information can be absolutely vital for the victim, and they're the priority, not the caller.

Age - because if he’s 30 or 80 makes a difference.

Did you see him fall - well did he trip over something, was he blind drunk, did he randomly collapse, was it a seizure, did he hit his head, how long ago did it happen? All make a difference.

I did this job for the police. The questions we asked were all for a reason. The well being of the caller wasn’t necessarily our first priority. Whether or not someone was on their way wasn’t necessarily a) something we could control or b) something we could guarantee. I learned that lesson the first time I promised someone that police were on their way, but that car got diverted to something more urgent and I had to tell them to wait longer.

This, it may seem unimportant to you but they do have to get lots more information then you would expect in order to triage

I think some people just assume the call handlers make a magic call to the ambulance crews and they come rushing.

Unfortunately, there are nowhere near enough ambulances and crews for this, so they have to have the information in order to prioritise.

This is why they tell you (if you can't stay on the phone) to call back immediately if the victim's condition worsens.

Thanks, these answers are interesting. But say you said to the call handler "this person has just been stabbed/shot in the chest", would they still ask all these questions about age and what happened etc BEFORE starting to order the ambulance to the scene? Surely it's "dispatch ambulance and tell victim it's on the way" and THEN "ask questions about what happened".

I'm fine with a brusque tone but agree with a pp that it almost seemed to tip over into aggression. The tone was quite dismissive actually. I can only imagine how distressing and frustrating this would be if it was a family member I was helping, not a random stranger.

I've been on a First Aid course and I think it would be useful to do practice calls with 999 so it's not a shock/surprise when you do it in real life and the person seems unhelpful/rude/aggressive.

I mean it's fine, the patient is the priority not me, but it did come as a bit of a shock to me when I'd already had a bit of a shock finding this man in a pool of blood. And I might have been more help answering their questions if I was calmer because they'd said they were sending help.

Yes, their focus has to be the welfare of the injured person. Not the person calling them. So the quicker they can get every piece of information, the better.

Most people phoning will be panicking or distressed. So the handler has to remain calm and matter of fact in order to get that information in an orderly way, rather than listen to someone gabbling and try to pick it out. A calm and somewhat brusque voice is likely to keep the witness on track and to the point.

I think you need to trust the process a bit more. They need to get specific information for a reason and the people they are trying to get it from are often not the best at giving accurate information. In your case you were composed and quickly gave useful information but they still needed more information from you. They aren't meaning to be rude but they need you to conserntrste and answer the questions.

Have you ever watched 999 call handlers working on a documentary? It's a difficult and frustrating job by the looks of it.

They also need to consider the safety of their staff, be it ambulance or police, is an offender on scene, has a weapon been used, whether a crime has been committed and to consider what resources are needed. You need to consider the bigger picture with what they are asking

If someone has been stabbed/ shot then the questions would change to questions about where the attacker is now, where is the weapon etc. - they'd also have to ensure the police arrived before the ambulance and that everyone would be safe to come and help/ aware of any ongoing dangerous situation/ know if it required an armed response.

It doesn't delay the ambulance because they're dispatching from the minute they see the address and the initial report

They have to ask. Calls are audited. If they get it wrong it means they could lose their job or end up in court
They can't bypass questions

Also they can't say the ambulance is on its way because
It might not be an ambulance, it could be a first responder etc
It might be diverted
They can say help has been arranged, they aren't delaying the help etc

Yeah absolutely I realise there must be a reason they are like this, that's why I'm asking. Because it seems to me to make the situation worse.