Youngest Age To Become An EMT

[Explorer343]

I know I've posted this twice before, but I figured the question belonged here more than anywhere else.

What is the youngest age to become an EMT-B? Location doesn't matter.

[DrParasite]

New Jersey will allow you to become an EMT at 16

[JohnWE]

Sorry but that's just wrong. No one who is not a legal adult should be giving other people medical attention. Obviously in a true emergent situation where there is no other help to be found we make exceptions.

I can only imagine the potential lawsuits that could be filed by a disgruntled family if a 16 year old child killed their family member thru negligence. How in the world can any EMS provider justify hiring children?

Imagine the family of the 16 yr. old EMT being sued because their kid did something wrong.

John

[DrParasite]

Sorry but that's just wrong. No one who is not a legal adult should be giving other people medical attention. Obviously in a true emergent situation where there is no other help to be found we make exceptions.

I can only imagine the potential lawsuits that could be filed by a disgruntled family if a 16 year old child killed their family member thru negligence. How in the world can any EMS provider justify hiring children?

Imagine the family of the 16 yr. old EMT being sued because their kid did something wrong.

JohnJohn, imagine the potential lawsuits that could be filed by a disgruntled family if a 18/21/25/85 year old who killed their family member through negligence. How in the world can any EMS provider justify hiring adults?

most places will not hire an EMT who is under 18. In fact, I can't think of any that do.

most volunteer squads require the senior EMT of a crew to be at least 18. That means that the 16 year old EMT who is treating the patient is being supervised by the over 18 year old EMT.

[JohnWE]

Sorry, but you missed my point.

Society, for good or bad, has determined that there are certain minimum ages that people are required to be before they can do certain things.

The most basic of these is to be an adult in the eyes of the law. A 16 year old child is not an adult in the eyes of the law. With certain exceptions, ie, emancipated minors, prosecution for certain criminal offenses.

Allowing a child to perform medical treatments is opening a door for legal actions. Your comparison to a 21 year old EMT is moot as a 21 year old is considered to be an adult in all 50 states. In other words, a patient's family could easily sue if the person treating their family member is a child, with or without supervision as the age of the EMT would be a central point. At least with an adult EMT they would have to have some sort of actual negligence to point to. Any lawyer worth his or her title could easily make the case that the act of allowing a child to perform medical treatments is in itself, negligence.

Not to mention that the family of the under age EMT is legally liable for the actions of the child. As the father of 2 teenagers I know that I wouldn't want to face the extra liability that allowing either of my kids to perform medical treatment would entail.

It's a bad idea all around. The last thing EMS as a whole needs is yet another example of lax judgement on the part of EMS providers by allowing children to offer medical treatment.

John E.

[Explorer343]

Sorry, but you missed my point.

Society, for good or bad, has determined that there are certain minimum ages that people are required to be before they can do certain things.

The most basic of these is to be an adult in the eyes of the law. A 16 year old child is not an adult in the eyes of the law. With certain exceptions, ie, emancipated minors, prosecution for certain criminal offenses.

Allowing a child to perform medical treatments is opening a door for legal actions. Your comparison to a 21 year old EMT is moot as a 21 year old is considered to be an adult in all 50 states. In other words, a patient's family could easily sue if the person treating their family member is a child, with or without supervision as the age of the EMT would be a central point. At least with an adult EMT they would have to have some sort of actual negligence to point to. Any lawyer worth his or her title could easily make the case that the act of allowing a child to perform medical treatments is in itself, negligence.

Not to mention that the family of the under age EMT is legally liable for the actions of the child. As the father of 2 teenagers I know that I wouldn't want to face the extra liability that allowing either of my kids to perform medical treatment would entail.

It's a bad idea all around. The last thing EMS as a whole needs is yet another example of lax judgement on the part of EMS providers by allowing children to offer medical treatment.

John E.

John, I think you are being a bit prejudice. Age is not necessarily the case. It's maturity and responsibility. Anyone can make a mistake whether it be a 16 y/o or a 26 y/o. Would I trust a kid that parties every other day and gets "passed out drunk" with my life? HELL NO! But would I trust a responsible 16 y/o who has a valid EMT certification? More often than not.

Just think, if you were experiencing a heart attack, would you shoo away a 16 year old who holds a valid EMT cert from an accredited program? As long as he/she presents himself in a mature and respectful manner and is under constant supervision of a more experienced EMT, then I would accept the help.

[DrParasite]

I didn't miss your point, your point isn't valid.

first off, a 16 year old isn't an adult in the eyes of the law. that is why most parents have to consent to them being on an ambulance.

Secondly, why does allowing a trained child to perform medical treatments. that they are trained to perform and certified exactly as any adult would be, open the door for any greater liability than an adult who is trained exactly the same? The age doesn't matter, whether a person is 16 or 89, what's important is the training.
Any lawyer worth his or her title could easily make the case that the act of allowing a child to perform medical treatments is in itself, negligence.what are you basing this on? is the child not qualified? does he not have the proper training? does the chlid take one class, and adults take another? did the child need to get a 70 to pass, while all the adults needed an 80? Like I said, your case doesn't exist, because there is not negligence. you are just letting your personal prejudices cloud your view. and I guarantee that every judge would throw out your case because of it.
Not to mention that the family of the under age EMT is legally liable for the actions of the child. As the father of 2 teenagers I know that I wouldn't want to face the extra liability that allowing either of my kids to perform medical treatment would entail.good, so I can rest easy knowing your kids will never be EMTs. I know when I was 16, my parents supported me. When I became an EMT (after my 17th bday) they supported me, and let me volunteer and treat patients.

think of it this way: assuming you are an EMT, can you imagine the liability you are exposing them to? you are treated patients, and if you get sued, they could lose their home. can you imagine the impact that will have on them? does that mean you will not be practicing as an EMT because of the impact your work will have on your family if you get sued?

You seem to be fixated on the age thing. and that is why your point is not valid. is an EMT who is 17 years old and has been an EMT for a year better trained than a 30 year old who has been an EMT for a day? or are they equally trained, with one being more experienced (in this case, the child).

There is no increased liability. the training is the same. a 30 year old EMT is as equally trained as a 16 year old EMT, provided they took the same course and both were held to the same standards.

It's only your personal prejudices and fear of getting sued (which is no worse whether it's a kid or adult) that is keeping you from accepting a child EMT as an equally competant provider as an adult EMT.

[Explorer343]

I didn't miss your point, your point isn't valid.

first off, a 16 year old isn't an adult in the eyes of the law. that is why most parents have to consent to them being on an ambulance.

Secondly, why does allowing a trained child to perform medical treatments. that they are trained to perform and certified exactly as any adult would be, open the door for any greater liability than an adult who is trained exactly the same? The age doesn't matter, whether a person is 16 or 89, what's important is the training.
what are you basing this on? is the child not qualified? does he not have the proper training? does the chlid take one class, and adults take another? did the child need to get a 70 to pass, while all the adults needed an 80? Like I said, your case doesn't exist, because there is not negligence. you are just letting your personal prejudices cloud your view. and I guarantee that every judge would throw out your case because of it.
good, so I can rest easy knowing your kids will never be EMTs. I know when I was 16, my parents supported me. When I became an EMT (after my 17th bday) they supported me, and let me volunteer and treat patients.

think of it this way: assuming you are an EMT, can you imagine the liability you are exposing them to? you are treated patients, and if you get sued, they could lose their home. can you imagine the impact that will have on them? does that mean you will not be practicing as an EMT because of the impact your work will have on your family if you get sued?

You seem to be fixated on the age thing. and that is why your point is not valid. is an EMT who is 17 years old and has been an EMT for a year better trained than a 30 year old who has been an EMT for a day? or are they equally trained, with one being more experienced (in this case, the child).

There is no increased liability. the training is the same. a 30 year old EMT is as equally trained as a 16 year old EMT, provided they took the same course and both were held to the same standards.

It's only your personal prejudices and fear of getting sued (which is no worse whether it's a kid or adult) that is keeping you from accepting a child EMT as an equally competant provider as an adult EMT.

His point is kind of valid. I wouldn't let a 4-year old be an EMT! :D

You have a point. Teenagers and adults would face practically the same penalties for messing up. A 30 y/o EMT who has held his cert for 13 years could be sued just the same as if a 16 y/o who held his cert for 6 months. The risks are pretty much the same. It all comes down to responsibility and maturity.

[Explorer343]

New Jersey will allow you to become an EMT at 16

Would that be valid anywhere or just in the state of NJ?

[mil1982]

In CA you have to be 18yrs old. My instructor put it in simple terms for our class. The reason for 18 is that if you have to appear as a witness in court, something about it requiring adults. I cannot remember it too clearly but it was something along those lines. Plus in CA we are required to report suspected child and elder abuse by law, so I imagine it is mostly a liability issue.

[JohnWE]

You missed a simple, clear and valid point.

I'm not going to continue to argue with you.

It has nothing to do with training, it has to do with legal responsibility.

Sorry you fail to see the obvious.

John E.

[tbonetrexler]

Would that be valid anywhere or just in the state of NJ?

i doubt any other state would allow you to transfer at under 18. I know Delaware wont, because DE requires NR to obtain a DE license.

[N2DFire]

In VA you must be 16 to be certified as an EMT.
12VAC5-31-900. General requirements.

EMS personnel shall meet and maintain compliance with the following general requirements:

1. Be a minimum of 16 years of age. (An EMS agency may have associated personnel who are less than 16 years of age. This person is not allowed to participate in any EMS response, or any training program or other activity that may involve exposure to a communicable disease, hazardous chemical or other risk of serious injury.)

2. Be clean and neat in appearance;

3. Be proficient in reading, writing and speaking the English language in order to clearly communicate with a patient, family or bystander to determine a chief complaint, nature of illness, mechanism of injury and/or assess signs and symptoms.

4. Have no physical or mental impairment that would render him unable to perform all practical skills required for that level of training. Physical and mental performance skills include the ability of the individual to function and communicate independently to perform appropriate patient care, physical assessments and treatments without the need for an assistant.


12VAC5-31-1450. BLS student enrollment requirements.

The enrolled student, certification candidate or EMS provider must comply with the following:

1. Be proficient in reading, writing and speaking the English language in order to clearly communicate with a patient, family or bystander to determine a chief complaint, nature of illness, mechanism of injury or to assess signs and symptoms.

2. Be a minimum of 16 years of age at the beginning date of the certification program. If less than 18 years of age, he shall provide the course coordinator with a completed parental permission form with the signature of a parent or guardian verifying approval for enrollment in the course.

3. Have no physical or mental impairment that would render him unable to perform all practical skills required for that level of certification including the ability to function and communicate independently and perform appropriate patient care, physical assessments and treatments without the need for an assistant.

4. Hold current certification in an approved course in cardio-pulmonary resuscitation (CPR) at the beginning date of the certification program. This certification shall also be current at the time of state testing.

5. May not have been convicted or found guilty of any crime, offense or regulatory violation, or participated in any other prohibited conduct identified in these regulations.

6. If in a bridge certification program, he shall hold current Virginia certification at the EMS first responder level.

7. Meet other requirements for course enrollment as set by the regional EMS council or local EMS resource, the PCD or the course coordinator, approved by the Office of EMS.


However - you cannot function in a "required staffing" position - i.e. driver or AIC.

12VAC5-31-1200. Minimum age of EMS vehicle personnel.

A. EMS personnel serving in a required staffing position on an EMS vehicle shall be at a minimum 18 years of age.

B. An EMS agency may allow assistants or observers in addition to the required personnel. An assistant or observer must be at a minimum 16 years of age.

[DrParasite]

Sorry you fail to see the obvious.obviously the states of New Jersey, Maryland and Virginia think you have no valid point either. I'm sure there are other states that are the same way, but you obviously fair to see the obvious :rolleyes:

[NJNewbie196]

I agree with the good Doc Parasite, as i am a teenage responder. There are some 16 and 17 y/o EMT's i know that i would much rather trust my well being and safety to and who i know passed the test on their first try then some 23 and 24 y/o EMTs i have met. Age has really nothing to do with the Quality of the care one can provide. Some services will put out an EMT for a 2 man crew who has as little as 3 months experience. Where say one receives their cert at 16, by the time their of age to drive and go unsupervised they will have had all ready 2 years of experience. Personally, i'm going to finish this year of High School before i go into classes but i still will be 16 by the time i get my cert. Back on a previous point, i have a buddy who was once the youngest Certified EMT in the state of NJ and i trust him more that some of the others in his class. I also believe that a 16 y/o taking the class would only take it if her were committed and interested in EMS vs. some 22 y/o who wants the cert just to get a job at a transport company.

[njemt538816]

right now i believe i am the youngest person on my squad to be cert.

[tbonetrexler]

right now i believe i am the youngest person on my squad to be cert.

Thank you for the amazingly informative post that added so much to the conversation. Maybe adding how old you are would help? I am assuming you are 16?

[njemt538816]

yes, i am

forgot to post that

[mdtaylor]

yes, i am

forgot to post that

Do us a favor and look on your certification and see if it contains the word "Provisional."

[njemt538816]

yes it does, i assume thats cause im only 16 right?

[mdtaylor]

yes it does, i assume thats cause im only 16 right?

Yeah, it is sort of a, well, provisional certification. When you turn 18 you can apply and immediately be fully certified. As a provisional EMT there are a host of things you cannot do. One is to ride as a 'required' crew member, if I remember correctly. Then there is a list of power tools, etc. that you cannot operate or even clean if it is in operation (who would want to anyway?) You ought to know what your limitations are...

Otherwise, you have the same level of training as any other Nationally Registered EMT-B

[njemt538816]

ok, so its basically like a provisional drivers license. Thats ok about the power tools though cause in my squad we do rescue too and inorder to even operate the tools you gotta be rescue cert. so i dont have to clean that, just all the crap in the back of the rigs, after a job. im gunna search right now but do you know of a site offhand that tells what the limitations are?

[mdtaylor]

ok, so its basically like a provisional drivers license. Thats ok about the power tools though cause in my squad we do rescue too and inorder to even operate the tools you gotta be rescue cert. so i dont have to clean that, just all the crap in the back of the rigs, after a job. im gunna search right now but do you know of a site offhand that tells what the limitations are?

Yeah, here is the text:

8:40A-5.2 Student qualifications (a) The requirements for enrollment in, and to receive credit for, an EMT-Basic training program shall be as follows:
1. Attainment of the age of 16 by the first day of the program;
i. Minors enrolled in an EMT-Basic training program shall be subject to the
limitations listed in (b) below:
2. Possession of CPR certification. The student shall maintain CPR certification
throughout the duration of the EMT-Basic training program and until such time as he or she is either certified as an EMT-Basic or terminated from the EMT-Basic training program. The student's CPR certification card shall be made available to Department staff upon demand; and
3. Physical capability to perform all required skills and tasks of an EMT-Basic
student as cited in the program curriculum.
(b) Minors enrolled in an EMT-Basic training program shall be subject to the following conditions:
1. Minors shall produce signed parental consent to participate in the program;
2. Minors shall agree to comply with all applicable labor laws, rules and/or
regulations, including, but not limited to, N.J.S.A. 34:2-21.17;
3. Minors shall agree to comply with all applicable rules regarding attendance,
performance and program examinations; and
4. Minors shall not be permitted to do the following in classes or after certification until they reach the age of 18
i. Operate power-driven machinery including, but not limited to, fire
apparatus, MAVs, BLS ambulances, MICUs, SCTUs and/or AMUs;
ii. Oil, wipe or clean any machinery in motion, inclusive of rescue tools;
iii. Utilize any machine that grinds, buffs, or polishes;
iv. Operate any hoisting equipment, inclusive of chain and cable come-a-
longs;
v. Utilize any torch device utilized to heat, melt or cut metals, including
rescue torches; or
vi. Operate and/or maintain any high-pressure hydraulic tool or air bag.
(c) No student shall be:
1. Exposed to injurious quantities of any toxic or noxious dust, gases, vapors
and/or fumes; or
2. Exposed to, or allowed to participate in, direct firefighting operations.
(d) Minors shall receive practical skills instruction and shall be permitted to safely observe any of the skills listed in (b) 4 above.
(e) The training agency shall ensure that the provisions of (b) 4 and (c) above are strictly enforced.
And it comes from this (http://www.state.nj.us/health/ems/documents/njac840ar.pdf) pdf document at the New Jersey Office of Emergency Medical Services.

Pay particular attention to #4 where it says " Minors shall not be permitted to do the following in classes or after certification until they reach the age of 18"

[DrParasite]

4. Minors shall not be permitted to do the following in classes or after certification until they reach the age of 18
i. Operate power-driven machinery including, but not limited to, fire
apparatus, MAVs, BLS ambulances, MICUs, SCTUs and/or AMUs;question: so by my interpretation of this rule, an EMT under the age of 18 is not permitted to drive an ambulance.

however, a 16 year old who isn't an EMT doesn't fall under the guidelines of the DOH, and as such falls under the motor vehicle laws of the state of NJ, which states that a person with a valid license can drive an ambulance, at age 17, provided they have a valid drivers license.

very interesting...

[njemt538816]

but there are limitation to that. i believe that you can only drive with 1 other passenger other than your household. when 17yr old, and provisional license

[Ardidi]

I am an EMT-B in central NJ, and I am 17 right now. As a provisional EMT, we are trained and allowed to render care just as any other EMT, under the supervision of an adult EMT. This obviously means that we cannot be the only EMT aboard a rig. And, according to state laws, as a provisional driver's license holder, we cannot drive a vehicle with more than one additional non-family member in the vehicle, so thus, we cannot be the driver of an ambulance. And also, our squad insurance does not allow a person under 18 to drive an emergency vehicle (I'm not sure if that is a state law as well).

However, I had one exception to this. We had a cardiac arrest call with a crew of a FF/EMT driver, our squad captian, and myself rolling our rig. After packaging the patient and putting him in the rig, both paramedics decided that they wanted to work on the patient. So this left our captain (who was the highest level member on that call) in the back with the medics to work on the patient, and the FF/EMT as the driver. However, the paramedics still had to get their ambulance to the hospital as well, and the only viable option was to let me drive it. So, I was ordered by the paramedics to drive their ambulance to the hospital, without anyone else aboard, obeying all speed limits and coming to a full stop at all intersections before proceeding through with lights and sirens. It was an exceptional situation, and the decision was made with the mindset of patient care as the priority. Did I break any laws? Well, that's a gray area. You decide for yourself. Keep in mind that the paramedics are a higher authority to us EMTs, so I rightfully obeyed their command.