As part of our student recruitment process we usually give them a short 
group task to do first, just to break the ice and for us to observe 
their personalities.

Anyway, part of the one they were given yesterday was to decide which 
order to rescue people trapped in a mine. Due to the logistics of the 
rescue it was very likely they would not be able to get them all out 
before they drowned.

They were given a paragraph about each person trapped: their age, sex, 
name, whether they had any children, what their job was, any other 
hobbies/community activities, heath problems etc.

That then got me thinking, real rescue teams surely have a set criteria 
and process they use to make decisions like this? They can't afford to 
waste time discussing in a hectic manner who to save first. Google 
didn't show up anything, maybe I don't know the correct words or phrases 
to use.

Any ideas or comments? What criteria would you use to decide?

Post a reply to this message

Le 12/05/2015 09:24, scott a écrit :
> As part of our student recruitment process we usually give them a short
> group task to do first, just to break the ice and for us to observe
> their personalities.
> 
> Anyway, part of the one they were given yesterday was to decide which
> order to rescue people trapped in a mine. Due to the logistics of the
> rescue it was very likely they would not be able to get them all out
> before they drowned.
> 
> They were given a paragraph about each person trapped: their age, sex,
> name, whether they had any children, what their job was, any other
> hobbies/community activities, heath problems etc.
> 
> That then got me thinking, real rescue teams surely have a set criteria
> and process they use to make decisions like this? They can't afford to
> waste time discussing in a hectic manner who to save first. Google
> didn't show up anything, maybe I don't know the correct words or phrases
> to use.
> 
> Any ideas or comments? What criteria would you use to decide?

You have the same issue at hospital for emergency and epidemia, or
accident: there is one in charge of sorting/classifying the injured.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Triage

It seems it mostly resolve to four colours: black, red, yellow, green.

The data that are not medical are irrelevant to the situation.
And even long term medical data is irrelevant (bipolar, daltonism,
sterile, ... )

Now if your problem resolves to "which ones are to be selected to die
?", that's a psychological trap.

-- 
Just because nobody complains does not mean all parachutes are perfect.

Post a reply to this message

> You have the same issue at hospital for emergency and epidemia, or
> accident: there is one in charge of sorting/classifying the injured.
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Triage

Sorry I wasn't specific in my explanation - there were no injuries, only 
that the explorers became trapped due to rapidly rising water levels. 
The task was to decide the order to rescue the people (knowing it is 
likely the last ones will not survive).

Post a reply to this message

On 12/05/2015 08:24, scott wrote:
> As part of our student recruitment process we usually give them a short
> group task to do first, just to break the ice and for us to observe
> their personalities.
>
> Anyway, part of the one they were given yesterday was to decide which
> order to rescue people trapped in a mine. Due to the logistics of the
> rescue it was very likely they would not be able to get them all out
> before they drowned.
>
> They were given a paragraph about each person trapped: their age, sex,
> name, whether they had any children, what their job was, any other
> hobbies/community activities, heath problems etc.
>
> That then got me thinking, real rescue teams surely have a set criteria
> and process they use to make decisions like this? They can't afford to
> waste time discussing in a hectic manner who to save first. Google
> didn't show up anything, maybe I don't know the correct words or phrases
> to use.
>
> Any ideas or comments? What criteria would you use to decide?


I would say none of the above criteria should be used. They are a 
distraction.

My order of priority would be:
1. Those who could save themselves without help.
2. Those who could save themselves with a little help.
3. Follow the triage procedures that Le_Forgeron linked to.

If there was no danger and you needed to prioritise who to treat. Bare 
in mind that the quiet victims may be more seriously injured than the 
loud ones. They tend to retreat into themselves.

-- 

Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message

On 12/05/2015 09:36, Stephen wrote:
>
> If there was no danger and

Just read your reply to Le_Forgeron.
1. then 2.
Not forgetting yourself.

-- 

Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message

'All politicians take one step forward!'
Now rescue the ones at the back

John
-- 
Protect the Earth
It was not given to you by your parents
You hold it in trust for your children

Post a reply to this message

> Just read your reply to Le_Forgeron.
> 1. then 2.
> Not forgetting yourself.

None of them can save themselves (climbing out is not possible), they 
have to be winched out one at a time. Luckily you're the one tasked to 
rescue them, not one of the ones trapped.

Post a reply to this message

On 12/05/2015 09:50, Doctor John wrote:
> 'All politicians take one step forward!'
> Now rescue the ones at the back
>
You get my vote. (Unless you ask for it.)


-- 

Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message

On 12/05/2015 09:50, scott wrote:
>> Just read your reply to Le_Forgeron.
>> 1. then 2.
>> Not forgetting yourself.
>
> None of them can save themselves (climbing out is not possible), they
> have to be winched out one at a time. Luckily you're the one tasked to
> rescue them, not one of the ones trapped.
>

Any other criteria that you have forgotten to mention? :-P

In that case it will be the person in the cave, mine who is elected (by 
the people there) who would decide the order of who goes out.
To be honest this exercise is so contrived that it is very unrealistic.

Fortunately I have never been in the situation but I have had the 
training. Stop me if I have mentioned that when I worked offshore I was 
in the First Aid and Rescue Team. Too late. ;-)
That was the sort of thing we trained for. Remember the the miners are 
not civilians and will have had training too. Also remember the Birkenhead.

-- 

Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message

Am 12.05.2015 um 09:24 schrieb scott:

> That then got me thinking, real rescue teams surely have a set criteria
> and process they use to make decisions like this? They can't afford to
> waste time discussing in a hectic manner who to save first. Google
> didn't show up anything, maybe I don't know the correct words or phrases
> to use.
>
> Any ideas or comments? What criteria would you use to decide?

I guess most people would go for the stereotypical "women and children 
first" approach.

Professional rescue teams, however, will probably take an entirely 
different approach:

- If there is reasonable danger of structural collapse during the rescue 
operation, or any other danger to the rescue team, nobody will go in at 
all. Self-protection is paramount.

- If there is some other reasonable danger that affects rescuees but not 
the rescue team (such as smoke, presuming the rescue team is wearing 
breathing aids), it is probably a matter of getting people out of the 
danger zone in the order they are encountered. Any time spent on 
assessing the "rescue-worthiness" of people would be time wasted, and 
would also put the rescue team under enormous mental pressure. People 
who cannot be extracted immediately for technical reasons, such as 
people trapped under heavy loads, are an exception. My guess would be 
that an initial attempt will be made to get them out, but if that fails 
rescue workers will call in technical help, while proceed to extract 
other people until that help arrives. The medical condition of the 
rescuees is irrelevant: Even if there is a high risk to further injure a 
person, they will be extracted from the danger zone.

- If people are in a sufficiently safe environment, but there is not 
enough qualified medical personnel to take care of all of them at once, 
there will be a team of paramedics responsible to assess the casualties' 
injuries to prioritize them. AFAIK people with the most severe injuries 
will have top priority, even if chances of survival are slim (*). In the 
meantime, paramedics will try to stabilize the most severely injured 
patients that medics cannot yet tend to, while unqualified volunteers 
will be assigned to tend to minor injuries, reassure more severely 
injured but stable people that they will receive the neccessary 
treatment in due time, or just make sure that people in a state of shock 
don't panic and run away.

(* I guess this might be different in a military environment, where 
death is necessarily a calculated risk.)

Post a reply to this message