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.

v powerfully put Mrs DV, thanks for your post.

PAD [public access fibrillation] is a highly effective strategy for patients with sudden cardiac arrest due to ventricular fibrillation who arrest in public places where AEDs are installed. Community responders who travel with an AED are less effective, but offer some prospect of resuscitation for many patients who would otherwise receive no treatment. Both strategies merit continuing development.

From bruxuer's link

OP perhaps you should use this document and those that wotnow linked to upthread to better inform the PTA. I think the consensus (here at least) is that if a defib is what they want to spend the money on then it would be preferable to buy a multi age version and to position it where the community can make best use of it.

Thinking some more about the OP, I think points 1, 3 and 4 are the most valid with point 2 being largely irrelevant. If you wanted to further investigate point 1, (and give it some perspective) it should be possible to find out from your LEA, how many deaths of children (if any) have occurred on school premises (not just your school) and what the cause of death was, in the last 10 years.

my eldest child is in Y12 .During his school career we have had 1 chikld die during a swimming lesson (not DS's class so he wasn't there thankfully. Still at primary school one of his classmates elder siblings was found dead in bed also with an undiagnosed heart condition .And in secondary school a girl collapsed and died at honme from a heart attack .While none of theese deaths occurred on school premises, they easily could have done.It is not a rare rare thing which almost never happens

Um but surely if it is the PTA who have raised the money, then it is for them to decide how it is spent.

"It is not a rare rare thing which almost never happens"

Erm, read the quoted statistics. It certainly is very rare. Just because you know of 3 children dying from a heart condition does not mean it is a common event. Humans are very poor at assessing risk based on experience and tend to see patterns where they don't exist, that's why statistics are so important.

I had 3 children go through school and can't actually remember anyone dying from cardiac probs, certainly not at school.
Just to balance oopsi's comment.

I think oopsi's death rate was uncharacteristically high. I don't think anyone from either of DS's schools died (from any cause - in or out of school) during the time he was there. Nor, for that matter, from either of my schools in days when child mortality must have been considerably higher.

The statistics from CRY (based on ONS figures) quote 12 young people a week suffer sudden cardiac death. Young in that context is under 35. That's a rise from previous estimates but I expect that's to do with better reporting/understanding.

So overall deaths not that rare (I believe there are less asthma deaths for example, in that age group) but only a certain % of those cardiac deaths would be in a shockable rhythm.

And only a small percentage of those would be in primary children

Saggar- the website also says that they do not know the true number of deaths because they are often recorded by the coroner as simply 'deaths from natural causes' so the figure is much higher than 12 per week.Also there will be a number who have had a cardiac arrest but NOT died due to prompt treatment.

oopsi

Did any of the children who died have a shockable rhythm? A heart attack is not VF and dieing from an undiagnosed heart condition is not VF either.

That's the point some of us have been trying to get accross, children die of heart conditions/diseases but very very few go into VF and if they are asystolic or in respiratory arrest a defib will not do any good.

not sure on YABU or YANBU, but wanted to make a few points (as a paramedic)

We are virtually never on station- having an ambulance station nearby will bear absolutely no relation to the time it takes to attend

Defibrillation is currently considered the most vital part (above drugs etc) of advanced aid in cardiac arrest

Defibrillators are idiot proof

Rapid defib use (within 5 mins, very unlikely to be delivered by an ambulance crew tbh) in cardiac arrest dramatically increases the chances of survival

Having said that, children rarely arrest in a rhythm that is shockable anyway, just wanted to point out the errors in your op really, haven't read the whole (massive!) thread

hmmm, have now read a few pages back and see there are far more qualified people than little old me on here who are much better at explaining what I have just tried to

Rene, so have you read gasmans posts, and do you disagree?

sashh haven't a clue!

Wow! I've been away without Internet and thought I'd see what happened to the thread- its still going strong!!

Has any one who thinks they are quite cheap considered that the pads do expire and need replacing? That you need two batteries- (always have to have a spare) that it will need servicing. People do require training and with staff turnover, and not everyone working full time or on leave- who will that be and how many are trained up? They are not that cheap, or only an initial outlay. Oh and the carbon footprint. Don't forget that

I'd rather all the cupcakes I bake etc. go towards something that actually will be used, by the school. But don't listen to me, I'm just another one of those health professionals.

Wow, I don't think I've changed my mind so many times reading a thread before! I started off thinking YANBU, then YABU I want one in my house and I'm going to join the PTA just so the DC's schools will get one, and now I'm back to YANBU - it's completely pointless if it's going to be one suitable for children only.

Thanks to the pros for putting the facts straight.

oopsi

And that's the point - had any of those three children had access to a defib, and someone trained to use it, there is little chance the outcome would be different.

Its a good example of how difficult it is to assess risk accurately - even when you know intellectually that the risk of something is really low, its hard to accept that emotionally when it is a low frequency but high 'magnitude' event.
If we all understood that properly none of us would buy lottery tickets either, and I know I do

Uncle would not be alive now if his heart had stopped the daybefore it chose to as the defib was new in his office that day.

As you were.

Is there any interest in the community of having a community defib and first responder team? that would seem a better solution.

'Its a good example of how difficult it is to assess risk accurately - even when you know intellectually that the risk of something is really low, its hard to accept that emotionally when it is a low frequency but high 'magnitude' event.'

and another thing to think about is that if the GB veto this idea and then a child or adult in school dies who might have been saved, could you live with yourself?

But what if a child dies from something else they could have spent the 1000 on? A lot of the time it may not even be obvious - does that make it less important?