EDITORIAL: CHARGING VICTIMS FOR EMERGENCY SERVICES IS A SLIPPERY SLOPE

Printer-friendly versionPrinter-friendly version Share this

 

By Miriam Raftery, Editor

January 18, 2009 (San Diego’s East County) – San Miguel Consolidated Fire Protection Board wants to charge drivers who cause accidents for costs of emergency services—fees estimated at up to $2,100. Director Karrie Johnston says she wants to hold “irresponsible” people responsible for costs of public safety services.

What’s next? If you’re “irresponsible” and ignore doctor’s orders to lose weight, shall ambulance companies charge you for paramedic services if you have a heart attack or stroke? How about people with old wiring in their homes, or those are “irresponsible” by causing a cooking fire? Shall we force them to pay for firefighters to save their home?

 

San Miguel faces an admittedly steep budget deficit of over $1 million for its next fiscal year. District residents voted down a proposed parcel tax to pay for fire services on the last ballot. It amounted to about the cost of a cup of Starbucks a month, per person. Critics contended that the district should have addressed its deficits in other ways, though Chief August Ghio notes that the district has already cut staff positions, taken one engine company out of service and saved the district $1 million by having employees pay their own retirement contributions.

If there is any fat left, then it should be trimmed. But if more revenues are needed, then the fairest solution is for ALL residents to share in the cost of emergency services so we can keep them affordable for everyone.  Charging accident victims for services that a public fire department is supposed to serve sets a very bad precedent.

The accident response fees would apply to district residents and non-residents alike, under an agreement approved Thursday night, though decisions must still be made as to what factors would trigger fees to be charged.  Fire Chief August Ghio estimates fees would generated $175,000 in revenues for the district, which encompasses unincorporated areas of El Cajon and La Mesa as well as communities of Bostonia, Casa de Oro, Crest, Mount Helix, La Presa, Rancho San Diego and spring Valley.

Ghio says the move isn't motivated purely by budget-savings, but also to "change drivers' behavior to make them pay more attention" and avoid accidents caused by carelessness. "A year ago, I got hit by a driver who looked down to pick up a CD," he said by way of example.

San Miguel isn't alone.  North County Fire recently implemented a cost recovery program. Lakeside Fire and the City of Chula Vista are considering similar fees, Ghio confirmed.

How far might cost-recovery programs be carried in the future?

Health insurance companies are now finding excuses to kick hordes of people off the insurance rolls when they get sick, claiming belatedly that policy holders failed to disclose often-minor preexisting conditions. So, too, would this proposal open the door for emergency services agencies of all sorts to find excuses to stop providing public services free to all – and instead, gouge victims of accidents, fires, or medical emergencies for life-saving or property-saving critical care.

I would grant an exception for drivers who have been found criminally liable in a court of law, such as a criminal involved in a high-speed chase or a drunk driver who causes an accident.  But not for ordinary people involved in an accident.

Even the most careful drivers can be found “at fault” in a car crash. I once swerved and hit a mailbox to avoid striking a dog that ran in front of my car. My insurance told me I should have hit the dog!  If you strike an animal or skid on a wet payment and cause damage, or your teen makes a judgment error and flips your car, you could now get stuck with a hefty bill for “public” services you thought you’d already paid for through your taxes.

Like Ghio, I was also struck by a negligent driver and faced staggering medical bills for injuries and surgery.  The driver's insurance wasn't even enough to fully cover my medical bills and damage to my vehicle.  Under Ghio's plan, insurance would cover fees recovered for accidents--meaning even less money available for accident victims hurt by a negligent drive.

Most chilling, the proposal could spur people NOT to call for emergency services if they know they will be charged. In Del Mar this weekend, a prominent veterinarian I once interviewed was found dead on a driveway after he attempted to walk away from an accident in which his car went into a ditch. I don’t know the reason why he didn’t wait for help. But surely we can expect more such tragedies if people who can’t afford emergency costs know that they will have to pay the price if they call for help for themselves or others in an accident in which they may be found at fault.

The photo in this story shows an accident that occurred when an elderly driver struck a fire hydrant. Bystanders saved him from drowning by lifting his head from beneath a pool of water until rescue workers summoned arrive on the scene. In the future, maybe some rescue workers start asking for proof of financial solvency before bringing out the Jaws of Life to extricate a trapped driver.

Do we really want our loved ones, friends and neighbors to feel that they need to try and douse a fire or free passengers trapped in a vehicle themselves, because they’re not sure if they can afford the cost of calling 9-1-1?

This editorial reflects the views of its author, the editor of East County Magazine.   If you wish to submit an editorial for consideration, contact editor@eastcountymagazine.org.

 

 


Error message

Support community news in the public interest! As nonprofit news, we rely on donations from the public to fund our reporting -- not special interests. Please donate to sustain East County Magazine's local reporting and/or wildfire alerts at https://www.eastcountymedia.org/donate to help us keep people safe and informed across our region.