|
Death of Medical and Aviation Personnel Should Not Be The Cost of Saving Lives.
June 6, 2007
New York — Monday's crash of a medical transport aircraft near Milwaukee once again highlights a crisis in medical aviation services. Air medical transport is both the riskiest type of flight operation and the most loosely regulated portion of the U.S. aviation industry, according to flight safety experts at the aviation law firm Kreindler & Kreindler LLP in New York and Los Angeles. And, over the past 10 years, the number of EMS aircraft has tripled.
While it is still too early to tell what caused the crash into Lake Michigan of the twin engine Cessna 550 operating on behalf of the University of Michigan, the accident should not be considered the "cost of saving lives."
"The crash rate of EMS aviation is frighteningly close to that of combat flying, with crashes occurring far more frequently than in business or general passenger aviation sectors," said Justin T. Green, an experienced helicopter and fixed wing pilot, aviation attorney and partner at the Kreindler law firm and the author of a Trial Magazine article on the subject, When Rescue Is Too Risky (February 2006). Mr. Green represents the families of several people who died in crashes of emergency medical flights.
No Standardization in EMS Flights Threatens Safety
"There remains no standardization in the operation of emergency medical flights, and the entry in recent years of private, for-profit companies into EMS aviation places substantial financial pressures on aircraft operators to fly to emergency scenes, often in dangerous conditions and sometimes even when their specific services are unsolicited," said Mr. Green.
On time sensitive flights, like ones carrying human organs to patients awaiting a transplant, pressure can sometimes interfere with safety.
In addition, medical aircraft are often not owned by their operators, but by third parties. This can blur the question responsibility for the maintenance of the plane and decisions of the pilots and flight dispatchers.
Equipment manufacturers and operators of emergency medical flight services haven't gone far enough to ensure the safety of the patients or the medical personnel they transport.
- Medical aircraft are not required to have flight data recorders
- EMS pilots do not have to comply with rest requirements
- Onboard safety equipment is totally at the discretion of the operator
"Accidents that similar in nature are sure signs that there is an ongoing problem," Green said. "The large number of EMS accidents is alarming, but not surprising where you have companies competing to fly dangerous missions and an industry wide attitude that death is the price of saving lives. How many more highly trained medical and aviation professionals must die before regulators realize the cost is too high?"
Kreindler & Kreindler LLP, Tradition of Excellence, New York, New Jersey, Boston, Los Angeles.
|
