Quiet Rooms

 

Quiet Rooms

This blog post is dedicated to the injured survivors of the mass school shooting at Robb Elementary School in Uvalde, Texas. Little has been published thus far about them. I ask everyone to understand the survivors warrant our attention, too.

Hospitals have many rooms including what physicians call quiet rooms. 

A New England Journal of Medicine article titled The Quiet Room was authored and published November 15, 2017 by Peter Masiakos, M.D. and Cornelia Griggs, M.D.

Their essay details what it’s like for physicians when they take loved ones aside to inform them their child has died. It was gut-wrenching to read:

“We introduce ourselves as the doctor who took care of their child. We take a deep breath, look into their eyes, and quickly break the devastating news — there is no reason to delay. What follows is the visceral, piercing shriek of a mother’s wailing, ‘Please God, not my baby!’ ”

But it doesn’t end there:

“We walk away from the encounter, our stomachs churning from the stale, metallic scent of a child’s blood barely dried on our clogs, our faces streaked with tears, and our hearts gripped in a vise as we tell ourselves that this senseless dying must end.”

Physicians are human, too.   

I do not believe quiet rooms are there solely to convey a message that a loved one has died, though.

My daughter survived the massacre at Columbine High School.

In the days and weeks that followed that massacre, I saw more quiet rooms than I care to remember. 

Sometime during the night of April 20, the ER surgeon who worked on Anne Marie stopped by. He was still wearing his scrubs. They had dried blood caked on them.

We went into a quiet room, the first of many. He wasn’t doing this to inform us our daughter had died. He did this to inform us of what they did in ER. I cannot speak of that here. It’s still too emotional.

His face said it all as he told us what they had to do, his eyes moist with tears as he told the story.

As dawn broke on April 21, chaos set in.....

Doctors, nurses, social workers, insurance company reps, psychologists, psychiatrists - all wanted to meet with us. 

There weren’t enough quiet rooms for all of them to meet separately with the families of the four injured Columbine students at Swedish Medical Center. 

A decision was made to implement a team approach.

Each family would meet individually with their team to discuss a treatment strategy for their loved one. 

Our team ushered us into a quiet room – actually a conference room – every day for two weeks straight.

We were consulted on treatment regimens and methodologies. Recommendations were made and we gave our consent. We felt helpless – overwhelmed, really. 

The trauma surgeon who saved Anne Marie’s life stopped by later that day to relate what he did in the OR.

We went into a quiet room. As it was with the ER doctor, I cannot speak of that here either.

He was a little less emotional than the ER doctor. I attribute that to his experience as a combat surgeon. 

A neurologist wanted to discuss the possibility Anne Marie might have brain damage and paralysis.

We went into a quiet room. 

A psychologist wanted to discuss the likelihood Anne Marie would need extended therapy for PTSD.

We went into a quiet room.

Anne Marie’s cardiologist needed to meet with us to discuss another surgery.

We went into a quiet room – the one I most vividly remember. 

He told us the pericardial sac around Anne Marie’s heart had filled with fluid. The fluid needed to be drained or the sac would keep filling and restrict her heart resulting in cardiac failure. 

He was asking our permission to drain that fluid using a long needle inserted into her chest. He’d be doing this virtually blind and with no anesthesia. 

The risks were great. The consequences of not doing anything were unacceptable.

Informing the rest of my family what lay ahead caused me to break into uncontrollable sobs. 

In the end, I can’t remember how many quiet rooms we were led into.

Anne Marie ultimately survived her injuries. That’s the miracle in all of this.

Gun violence isn’t unique to mass shootings. It’s an epidemic that knows no boundaries. 

Health professionals deal with it daily. Some are trying to do something about it.

Dr. Masiakos has become instrumental in starting a movement called ‘This is our lane” in response to a certain NRA admonition to medical professionals I have a huge problem with.

His lane is also my lane to help end gun violence.

Please consider sharing with family and friends.

My two cents.

* Comments on this blog are moderated.

Call to 'Arms': Should We Really Arm Teachers And Put God Back In Schools?

 

Relax folks. I'm not advocating what the title of this blog implies. Far from it, in fact. Exactly the opposite, in fact. It's meant to be tongue in cheek, in fact. It's meant to be snark, in fact. It's also meant to help drive home a serious point about something that seems to pop up in our society following virtually every mass school shooting:

That there's one helluva lot more to these two issues than simply placing a gun and a bible in a teacher's hands.

So, that being said, and in that context, let's end this discussion regarding arming teachers and putting God back in schools once and for all, shall we? Sorry....rhetorical.

Truth be known, these two issues are heating up....again. So, this blog post may be in vain, but all y'all can't blame a guy for trying, right?!

With President Biden's recent executive actions addressing the gun violence epidemic in this country, the debate on gun reform (I prefer this label rather than gun control) and putting God back in our schools are once again front and center in the debate over said gun reform. There are an awful lot of strawman arguments out there on each of these very contentious issues although we aren't hearing nearly as much of those from the notorious National Rifle Association (NRA) here lately. Seems they're in some pretty deep doodoo as we speak. 

Even without the NRA, though, lots of folks seem hell bent on providing their own opinions.

Politicians and media talking heads come immediately to my mind when I think of gun reform discussions.....and not necessarily in a good way. Both have uttered some pretty vitriolic rhetoric in my opinion. I won't go into details because if I did, this blog post would take forever to get done. Suffice to say politicians and talking heads have been vocal regarding the two subjects of this blog post on numerous occasions.

But I digress.

Sadly, factual data to support gun reform advocacy is still in short supply. A lot of why that is can be placed squarely on the shoulders of the NRA due to their steadfast and powerful opposition to any kind of gun reform in decades past. I believe they have been singularly responsible for establishing road-blocks to gathering and analyzing gun violence data more than any other organization or individual.

There are facts, to be sure, but factual data to support one's positions, opinions, or whatever are woefully lacking. Thanks NRA....or not. 

Don't get me wrong. It's getting better, and I believe the President's executive actions will ultimately help move that metaphorical needle in that direction, especially now that the NRA doesn't seem to be nearly as much of a force for opposition as they have been in years past.

With that in mind, and in the meantime, I'm going to make what I consider to be a tongue-in-cheek proposal (the real subject of this blog post) based on some of the things I've been seeing regarding pro-gun advocacy to arm teachers and put God back in schools. Yeah, I know....it sounds like I'm beating a dead horse here, but, truth be known, those two issues are once again raising their ugly heads in discussions on social media and in political circles.

Before I begin, though, I want to make it absolutely and emphatically clear that I personally believe even the idea of arming school staff in any capacity is absurd with the single exception of properly vetted, trained, and certified School Resource Officers! 

I also believe putting God 'back' into schools is equally absurd! Why? Because God was never in schools to begin with. Putting God 'back' in schools is a play on words.....nothing more. 

Because these two issues appear to be at the forefront of quite a few 'discussions' I keep seeing, here's my proposal: 

In order for us to gather and analyze empirical data we will need to conduct a study. A study like this may or may not be scientific in its approach (likely not), but it should yield some definitive, albeit potentially flawed and controversial, data/information for us to look at. The study under consideration would include the following:

• School districts across the U.S. (in order to get a definitive cross-section of urban vs rural perspectives), on a volunteer basis, will designate one school in their district, be it a high school, a middle school, or an elementary school (doesn't matter which) as a school in which ALL teachers and teaching applicants, maintenance personnel, and administrators will be required to carry loaded guns as part of their job responsibilities. Type of guns will be determined by the individual district before implementing this directive.
• The designated schools will eliminate 'gun free zones', meaning concealed and open carry will be allowed on campus....by anyone and everyone.
• All school personnel will be required to engage in adequate training on the use of both their guns and the use of lethal force. The definition of 'adequate' training will be determined by each school district participating in this study.
• All school personnel will be required to undergo rigorous psychological evaluations as a requirement to participate in the program prior to being accepted.
• Enrollment of children of the appropriate age group for the particular school will be voluntary. Parents will be the sole decision maker(s) regarding their children's attendance at said schools.
• 'God' will be brought into these schools by posting of the Ten Commandments in conspicuous areas throughout the campus (perhaps replacing those gun free zone signs that were taken down?). Children will be required to participate in prayer sessions led by teachers. Classes in religious teachings will be required as part of the school curriculum. As to which particular religion receives the most emphasis will be decided by the school district participating in the study. Christianity, Islam, Hinduism, etal are just a few to choose from.

Anything else anyone can think of? I'll be glad to consider adding it to the list.

If teachers are willing to carry and go through required weapons training, there should be no difficulty filling teaching positions, right?

Likewise, if maintenance personnel and administrators are willing to carry and go through required weapons training, there should be no problem filling those positions either, right?

If participating schools and communities are comfortable with the elimination of gun free zones, the probability anyone and everyone might be packing heat on their campus shouldn't be a problem either, right?

If parents feel more comfortable having their children in this type of educational/religious environment with armed teachers, administrators, and maintenance staff, the classrooms should be overflowing, right?

If teachers are comfortable acquiring the necessary religious credentials to fulfill their roles as being able to teach whichever religion is of primary emphasis in their school, there should be no problem filling those positions either, right?

Whether we see virtually full or virtually empty buildings as a result of this study should tell us all we need to know, right?

A nationwide study like this should help put to rest any argument either side has on the issues of arming teachers and bringing God 'back' into our schools, right?

Once the results are in, we can then have every school in the country conform to the results either way, right?

Sound silly? Sound idiotic? Well, that's the intended point of this proposed study.

My two cents.

* Comments on this blog are moderated.

School Safety Is An Enigma.....

School Safety Is An Enigma.....

School safety doesn’t necessarily translate into schools being safe….or as safe as they can be.

How is that an enigma, you ask?

Well, schools are supposed to be safe learning environments, but engaging in school safety activities often times can be like dragging a horse to water, but getting that horse to drink? Well, that's the school safety enigma. In other words, getting schools to do anything at all in school safety other than mandated drills including active shooter drills, ain't easy by any stretch of the imagination.

For example, listen to Ready As You'll Never Be, and you’ll see what I mean. If you'd like to read the transcript instead of listening to it, there's a link to same on the page.

This interview is with two Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School (MSD) teachers who appear to believe they were as ready as possible for an active shooter in their school. 

But were they, really?

These teachers based their perceptions of readiness on training they’d received prior to the massacre at MSD. They also kind of gave the impression there’s nothing more that could have been done to prepare leading up to the massacre, hence the title of the interview.

The Sun Sentinel, a Florida media outlet, contradicted that perception by characterizing educator and police response to the MSD massacre as Unprepared and Overwhelmed.

Also from the Sun Sentinel:

Deputies who responded to Parkland tragedy hadn’t had active shooter training in years, investigators found

Those two headlines pretty much say it all in my opinion.

And one more from the same publication:

Sheriff Israel defends agency's performance in Parkland shooting

According to this article, Sheriff Israel’s stated agency policy is that deputies “may” rather than “shall” engage an active shooter. He indicated he inserted that language into agency policy himself.

Israel also blamed “bad communications” for problems that day.

As an emergency management specialist (retired), I truly don’t know if I should laugh hysterically, sob uncontrollably, or just bang my head against the wall…..repeatedly!

Following the Columbine massacre, then Colorado Governor Bill Owens signed an executive order creating the Columbine Review Commission to conduct an independent review of that massacre.

The final Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School Public Safety Commission Initial Report was published January 2, 2018. 

The MSD Report cited Columbine as one of several school shooting benchmarks for identifying and analyzing what went wrong at MSD. 

A comparison using school colors of the two schools to illustrate a few more notable (in my opinion) recommendations from each report:

The “should” recommendations made by the Columbine Review Commission changed to “shall” requirements in Colorado with the passage of two laws; Senate Bill 08-181 requiring emergency management programs in schools, and Senate Bill 11-173 requiring interoperable communications in schools.

The State of Florida created an  Office of Safe Schools in response to the massacre at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School and to passage of SB 7026, the Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School Public Safety Act. 

Does anyone besides me see what’s going on here? Confused yet?

Were Florida officials who were/are tasked with making schools safe in their state even aware of lessons learned from Columbine prior to the massacre at MSD? 

If they were aware and did nothing in the interim between the Columbine massacre and the massacre at MSD to address their own school safety planning deficiencies, might that not be a bit of a problem?

If they were only trying to address them after the fact, after their own massacre, something I call being reactively proactive, might that not be a bit of a problem? 

If being reactively proactive after the fact is the best we can do, then school safety is, in fact, an enigma….of extraordinary proportions.

My two cents.

* Comments on this blog are moderated.