DeKalb County Wrongful Death Suit Settled – Lesson Learned
A settlement has been reached in the lawsuit against DeKalb County arising out of the death of Ann Bartlett. Mrs. Bartlett died on January 24, 2010 after her oxygen device sparked a fire in her home.
Bartlett called 911 to report the fire and fire trucks responded to her house, but apparently returned in service when they saw nothing visible from the street. They returned several hours later to find the house well involved.
The suit was filed by Bartlett's family against the county and five firefighters. CBS Atlanta is reporting that the settlement was for $200,000, and includes assurances that steps have been taken to prevent a reoccurrence. CBS Atlanta is also reporting that interim DeKalb County Fire Chief Eddie O'Brien has outlined 10 specific changes the department has made in the aftermath of the debacle.
The settlement releases the county and the five individual defendants from liability, but does not admit responsibility. The ten specific changes include:
1. Updating of ICS guidelines and associated training
2. Mandatory use of ICS on all incidents
3. Battalion chiefs to verify all incidents where company officers wish to cancel additional units
4. Mandatory 360 walk around of the location of a reported fire.
5. Clarification of level 1 staging.
6. Clarification on what crews should do if an address cannot be located.
7. Improvement in tracking critical factors such as Address, Call Back Number, Information on the MDT, Location of Incident, Size Up and a 360 view.
8. Education on the Automatic Number Identification and Automatic Location Identification system.
9. Review of the training required of acting officers.
10. Improvements to GIS mapping on the Mobile Data Terminal in fire apparatus
For more information, including video coverage.
I can’t believe the first two changes, specifically number 2! It’s been almost 10 years since DHS implemented the use of ICS for emergency services across the country! I realize that it was never mandated but I still don’t understand why departments insist on ignoring this system? In my opinion there is no downside to learning how to use ICS so why keep fighting it? Yet another example of our profession needing to get out of the past!
On another note I am really impressed the family didn’t look for the platinum parachute. Very rarely do I agree with families suing to make a small fortune but with the blatant disregard for any kind of professionalism in this case I would have been all for it.
Sad that it took a situation like this for a department to wake up to current standards.
Shane
The one that get’s me is requiring the BC to confirm the initial IC’s decision to cancel other units. Sounds to me like they cannot trust their company officers to make good decisions (which I doubt is the case).
If they seriously cannot trust their company officers to make good decisions – the solution is to train them better and hold the accountable – not shift the burden to the responding chief officer.
Be that as it may…..
Your other point is actually worthy of a significant research project (any EFO’s out there looking for a topic?????)- there is a common sentiment among families of people who have been killed through someone else’s wrongful conduct and it is evident in case after case: we want to make sure this never happens again.
I know the media portrays cases like this as little more than greedy plaintiffs and even greedier lawyers looking to take advantage. Having been close to numerous such cases – that is not usually the case at all. The families are angry and outraged. Its not about money – in fact in many cases the family is so outraged that they want criminal charges brought against those responsible.
In my non-psychologist opinion, the families often have a sense of justice that has been violated. In some ways – its a matter of vengence. The family members often equate the monetary award with sending a message to the wrongdoers.