AIBU to disagree with PTA buying defibrillator for primary school?

[Babylon1]

That's it really.

I'm on the governing body at local primary school and the PTA have decided they are going to purchase a defibrillator for the first aid kit.

This is really down to one member of the PTA having suffered a terrible loss due to congenital heart defect which was undiagnosed in a child. NOT a child at this school I hasten to add.

Now, as a governing body, we have a wish list of what we would ideally like the PTA to help purchase, and at the moment we are prioritising interactive whiteboards, a new reading scheme and some new phonics materials - resources that will be used EVERY day by the pupils.

The PTA are insistent in buying the defibrillator ASAP, and I am equally insistent that we neither want/need it for the following reasons:

1. The likelihood of it EVER being used is hopefully very very slim

1. There is an ambulance station with trained medics less than 5 mins away at normal driving pace. On blues and twos an ambulance would/could be present inside of two mins.

1. There has been no consultation with staff, yet 5 of them would be expected to be happy to be trained to administer the defibrillator if it

was required.

1. There has been no consultation with parents to ascertain if they would be happy for their DCs to be defibrillated at school by a non-professional medic (I certainly wouldn't be)

Before I would be in the slightest happy about this, I want a demo from the company providing the equipment on how easy it is to use, bearing in mind it is a paediatric defibrillator.

I want to know who will make the decision that the defibrillator is required - ie who is going to diagnose the child with a failing heart?

What happens if/when it goes wrong? Will the administrator of the defibrillator be held responsible?

So am I being unreasonable?? Really appreciate your thoughts here as I need to feed back to governors at next meeting.

I quoted guidelines (which are based on systematic review and expert opinion). Stating that the european resuscitation council recommends defibs only to be placed where there is a risk of cardiac arrest once every 2 years and the UK lot recommend it once every 5 years.

There is systematic review on this but it is being ignored by the people on this thread, by the UK based pressure groups.

I do not want to be quoted at any meeting in the school but I do want the OP (and others on the thread) to understand why in primary school age children a defib is most unlikely to be required even in the event of cardiac arrest.

I really am bowing out now.

it's not healthy to believe everything someone tells you just because they have 'Dr' before their name.

No but I'll trust their opinion far more than emotive anecdotes.

My point is crash that not believing everything doesn't equate to fear of intellect.

I agree with you saggar. However, some people on this thread are poo-pooing evidence from those who do know more than them.

"This whole debate reminds me of the irritation that my dad (radiologist) expresses about well-meaning but in practice unhelpful people who fund-raise for expensive medical equipment in poor parts of Africa which then, at best, sits and decays, and at worst, diverts resources and manpower from activities which would more effective and save more lives, like basic nursing and vaccinations. "

This is not in Africa and OP is "prioritising interactive whiteboards" over a defibrillator, some argue an essential piece of equipment in a first world country. Well, more important than the bloody interactive whiteboards are...

Not read the whole thread, just the first few pages.

Whatever I think about the original post has probably been said zillions of times already. Babylon I do think you raise some very valid concerns. However, it will be very, very difficult for people at your school to discuss this in a rational & non emotional way.

Whoever it was that said it, your cousin didn't 'die' Death is not reversible (clearly) their heart stopped beating & was then restarted, a cardiac arrest. I am being pedantic & rude I know, it just makes me want to scream! It must have been a terrifying ordeal for your family though & I hope he/she is back to playing football & leading a normal life now.

a defibrillator, some argue an essential piece of equipment in a first world country. Well, more important than the bloody interactive whiteboards are...

That's the crux of the issue. How can it be argued it is essential when the likelihood of being used in a primary school is so low?

As I said about a hundred pages ago....use the money to train all staff and volunteers in paediatric CPR and if there is any money left over, use it to run courses in paediatric CPR for parents. That would be a fantastic use of money.

Folly you're missing the point. they don't want to save childrens lives. They want to buy a defibrillator!

What on earth do you mean stealth and why are you being so snidey on this thread?
Are you seriously suggesting that the PTA dont care about saving lives and just want to buy a bit of equipment? Particularly as the OP as disclosed that one of member's child died as result of a heart defect.
I dont think there is a need for it.
If you think the op is not being unreasonable, fine.
Its ok for others not to agree. That is rather the point of AIBU.

I actually think the lack of understanding re the bereaved member of the PTA is a bit shite.

Do you not realise that once your child has died you are likely to do pretty much anything to save someone else from going through the same thing?
Why do you think so many parents set up charities, funds, trusts in the aftermath of a loss despite bearly having the energy to get out of fucking bed?

Still, as long as someone 'wins' this thread...

I'm suggesting that what they are choosing to do is buy a defibrillator. Which is absolutely fine and is their right. If the aim was to save as mny children's lives as possible with the money available I suspect the solution may be different. That's all honestly. I am not ascribing sinister motives to them, just suggesting they have fixated on the defib idea as the be all and end all. I know this I'm straying into very sensiove territory, and while I have a wider point to make about risk assessment in everyday life, I am not looking to score points that come from children's lives. I promise. If they want to buy a defibrillator, then (i assume) as the Pta body they are well within their rights to spend that money on what they think best, and whether I agree is totally irrelevant. Tbh what's really got.my goat is Tje attitude on here towards the op that she ibu to even dare question it - it can eve children's lives therefore you heartless botch is how I've interpreted it.

And yes it is extremely sad that his child died of a heart condition where a defibrillator may have helped. Don't ypu suspect though that this has increased his perception of the prevalence of this condition in children?

Sorry "may have increased", that should have said.

I think it has probably made him passionate about the subject, yes.
He is not going to get his child back so his motives are aultruistic.
Also once you have lost a child statistics become utterly meaningless.
Because when people are going on about 1 in a 1000 chance, they are talking about your child, the one that died, as if they are meaningless.

This is why bereaved people get things done, ofter at the expense of their own mental health, they are driven and yes, this does skew their perception but it also means they get stuff done.

The save lives. Look into some of the modern charities and you will see they were started many years ago by some parent who was probably sneered at for making a fuss at the time.
Campaigns to stop children strangling themselves with blind cords, dying from CO2 poisoning, drowning, getting killed by speeding drivers...they will all be dismissed as a bit mental and over the top at some point.

But thank fuck for all the mental bereaved parents and those that support them. Their mentalness and driven, desperation to stop another child dying could save your kid one day.

"Folly you're missing the point. they don't want to save childrens lives. They want to buy a defibrillator!"

No, they (the OP) don't want to save childrens lives. They want to buy an interactive whiteboard as far as I understand.

CPR is not very effective when one faces the heart stoppage. In fact it is not effective at all.

"CPR is not very effective when one faces the heart stoppage. In fact it is not effective at all."

What.the.hell.

Please PLEASE read some of gasman's eloquent and evidenced posts, my own no less accurate but MUCH swearier effort upthread, or if you can't bear to accept that we're (amongst others, convenience sample only, apologies) right, just go to the Resus Council's website here and bring a little education into your life.

There hardly likely to be saving children's lives. There is an outside possibility that it may save a child's life. Quite a slim chance though.

More chance of it falling off the wall and killing one, in all likelihood.

bruxeur calm down. i went to a medical school albeit many years ago, so i know a little about the subject. cpr will not restart the heart, it will help the flow until the help arrives. lives are lost because defib are not employed in time. one of the problems is knowing where the nearest one is and another finding a person that can use it. agree with gasman, buying paed one is not very clever. but i think they should be employed as part of a national programme, not "interactive whiteboard" or defibrillator, which is a weird discussion.

Was it the Correspondence Medical School of Pretendsville, Nebraska?

I hear they have a fabulous made-up faculty.

hahaha, very funny
it was the main medical school in one of european countries, late 80s early 90s. i am not sure why you are so aggressive, given i am just sharing my opinion on an internet forum. it is a well-known fact that cpr effectiveness in cardiac arrest is below 15%, much below aeds. nothing to do with "what.the.hell"

Oh my life.

you should walk off and go find one and call 999 and then come back rather than starting CPR? And emphasises how you should ALWAYS do this?

Great. you obviously trained in this a lot.

I obviously had better training than you.

You are being incredibly rude and do not know what you are talking about. please read gasman's posts.

I agree with you mrsdv. And I would imagine blind cords and rtas kill and maim a lot more children. I'm questioning the value of buying an expensive piece of kit where the chances are high ot will never ever need to be used.
Bemybebe a lot of your arguments seem to relate to adults and youre arguing the facts in a situation where it has happened. Looking at the bigger picture, do you agree that a defib is extremely unlikely to be needed in a primary school that has no children with known heart conditions?
I don't think any of us are arguing about how wed hope our children could be treated if it happened to them (i was but was wrong), were just not convinced about prevalence