It is clear that the recently formed group Fire Service Based EMS Advocates (FSBEMSA) has ruffled the feathers of some EMS providers and leadership of some EMS national organizations who are not fire based.

FSBEMSA consists of five national fire service organizations - the International Association of Fire Chiefs (IAFC), International Association of Fire Fighters (IAFF), Congressional Fire Services Institute (CFSI), National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) and National Volunteer Fire Council (NVFC) - and its goal is to demonstrate the value of fire-based EMS. The disparaging remarks of those who got their feathers ruffled can be read on Internet correspondence. You can hear their disdain whispered in the back halls of conferences and even in the conference halls themselves. In some cases, it is not even whispered. Some are downright vocal with their opinions about fire service-based EMS and the recent formation of FSBEMSA.

What is confusing is - why?

FSBEMSA does not attack other EMS system designs such as third-service and private ambulances companies, hospital-based ambulances or others. In a White Paper and video that FSBEMSA has released, the group champions the attributes and value of fire-based EMS systems. Can we really expect a non-fire-based national EMS organization to be a promoter of fire service-based EMS? But before the ink was dry on the White Paper, some individuals and some within some national EMS organizations were crying foul. Obviously, they felt threatened and were displeased that such a document and video would be released to decision-makers and politicians.

The advocacy by FSBEMSA is not an indictment on other EMS models, but is a response to the need to show the value of fire-based EMS after recent attacks. Within the past five to seven years, it has become fashionable to bash fire-based EMS and firefighter/paramedics. This has been in official ways and unofficial ways.

As an example, a medical doctor who sits on the Judiciary Oversight Commission for EMS in Washington, DC, wrote in an e-mail to other commission members last year, "The truth is fire-based EMS is expensive, inefficient care." His biased comments cannot be supported with any studies or scientific evidence. Other instances that have cropped up, including an academic paper issued by George Washington University last year that was circulated within the Beltway in Washington implying that third-service, private and hospital-based EMS programs are the proper way to design an EMS system.