new cadet meds Reg....

[coudano]

yah that's right,
let's hurt or kill some cadets first
before we get a clue.

[sarmed1]

To the above, it is in direct violation of the reg that says that CAP will no longer store meds, and that wing needs to knock it off immediately, and during that conversation, explain why they have a "Medical Operations Building" at all.  The new 52-16 makes it clear that there is no gray area in regards to storage, CAP can check them, track them, and make even bar participation if they don't do as their parents directed on the 31, but we can't store them anymore.

No that is the problem.  It doesnt make it clear, we all know from the draft, and assume from discussions here that is the intent of the regulation, but it doesnt actually say that.  What the regulation specifically prohibits is dispensing of medications.... it doesnt give a specific reference to CAP will not collect them (like I am pretty sure the draft said).   Self storage is the intent, but is this gray enough for them to argue centralized storage with open access is acceptable?

I have no problem with a medical operations building per say; no differant than having a nurses office at school.  What goes on there is sometimes questionalble, but the principal is sound, but needs to be toned down frequently.  There is much within the realm of the HSO that a dedicated medical operations function is acceptable (given it doesnt need to be a large function, as some wings make it out to be)
mk

[Eclipse]

52-16 is no longer a "draft", is went into effect on 1 February 2011.

Further, on 2 March 2011, CAPR 160-2 went into effect, which specifically addresses the issue:

2. General Rule.  The taking of prescription medication is the responsibility of the individual
member for whom the medication was prescribed  or, if the member is a minor, the member's
parent or guardian.  Except in extraordinary  circumstances, CAP members, regardless of age,
will be responsible for transporting, storing, and taking their own medications, including inhalers
and epinephrine pens.

Medical "operations" at encampments and other CAP activities are very different from school nurses.
School nurses are charged by their profession and their employment to diagnose, treat, and even be involved in
long term intervention and mediation of pupil medical issues.   Not so in CAP, which bars members from anything
but life-saving treatment up to the point EMS arrives.

[sarmed1]

The argument I am envisioning here will involve the encampment saying that the individuals are storing them; in the medical building rather in their personal unlocked locker.......where anyone could wander in and steal them.

mk

[Eclipse]

I could see people trying to make the argument, but any centralized storage would clearly be in violation of 160-2.  You can't have a "more secure"
central storage without someone managing the situation, which puts us back in the front of the line for storing.  The slippery slope would then
be a commander saying there are security issues across the board and requiring them to all be "secured".

Absent supervision, you have a room or refridg full of meds that anyone can go and "shop" from without impediment, another bad idea.

CAP NHQ obviously wants to be out of the pharmacy business.

[PHall]

The argument I am envisioning here will involve the encampment saying that the individuals are storing them; in the medical building rather in their personal unlocked locker.......where anyone could wander in and steal them.

mk

What, you don't secure your buildings when they're not occupied?

[davidsinn]

I could see people trying to make the argument, but any centralized storage would clearly be in violation of 160-2.  You can't have a "more secure"
central storage without someone managing the situation, which puts us back in the front of the line for storing.  The slippery slope would then
be a commander saying there are security issues across the board and requiring them to all be "secured".

Absent supervision, you have a room or refridg full of meds that anyone can go and "shop" from without impediment, another bad idea.

CAP NHQ obviously wants to be out of the pharmacy business.

My state's laws require central storage of meds for summer camps. Here's an excerpt from our draft 160-2:

Medications for cadets (including both prescription and non-prescription medication as defined by this regulation), except those a physician prescribed for self-administration such as epi pens, inhalers, etc, shall be locked in a cabinet, box, or drawer or stored in a safe place inaccessible to cadets (410 IAC 6-7.2-17, e).  Prescription medication containers will have their original labels attached. 

I bolded the portion that is word for word from the state law, note that the red word was children in the law. These laws go into effect for an overnight activity that exceeds 72 hours.

[Eclipse]

I could see people trying to make the argument, but any centralized storage would clearly be in violation of 160-2.  You can't have a "more secure"
central storage without someone managing the situation, which puts us back in the front of the line for storing.  The slippery slope would then
be a commander saying there are security issues across the board and requiring them to all be "secured".

Absent supervision, you have a room or refridg full of meds that anyone can go and "shop" from without impediment, another bad idea.

CAP NHQ obviously wants to be out of the pharmacy business.

My state's laws require central storage of meds for summer camps. Here's an excerpt from our draft 160-2:

Medications for cadets (including both prescription and non-prescription medication as defined by this regulation), except those a physician prescribed for self-administration such as epi pens, inhalers, etc, shall be locked in a cabinet, box, or drawer or stored in a safe place inaccessible to cadets (410 IAC 6-7.2-17, e).  Prescription medication containers will have their original labels attached. 

I bolded the portion that is word for word from the state law, note that the red word was children in the law. These laws go into effect for an overnight activity that exceeds 72 hours.

No, they don't, at least not in a CAP cotext.

This statuate is specific to "Youth Camps", not generalized overnight activities.

410 IAC 6­7.2­14 "Youth camp" defined
Authority: IC 16-19-3-4
Affected: IC 16-19-3
Sec. 14. "Youth camp" means any area or tract of land established, operated, or maintained to provide more that
seventy-two (72) continuous hours of outdoor group living experiences away from established residences for
educational, recreational, sectarian, or health purposes to ten (10) or more children who are under eighteen (18)
years of age and not accompanied by a parent or guardian.

You also can't generalize "children" to "cadets", since we have cadets over 18 who are not covered by this.

Though called "encampments", there are currently no CAP encampments which occur in outdoor settings.  NESA, HMRS, or maybe
CSS might have something that long, but not encampments.

Regardless, CAP regs don't trump state or federal law, so in those cases a Wing JAG would probably need to get involved and
decide what has to be done...

...except...

...since many encampments occur on federal military installations, what the state wants might, or might not be, irrelevant - again
a job for the JAGs.

[davidsinn]

I could see people trying to make the argument, but any centralized storage would clearly be in violation of 160-2.  You can't have a "more secure"
central storage without someone managing the situation, which puts us back in the front of the line for storing.  The slippery slope would then
be a commander saying there are security issues across the board and requiring them to all be "secured".

Absent supervision, you have a room or refridg full of meds that anyone can go and "shop" from without impediment, another bad idea.

CAP NHQ obviously wants to be out of the pharmacy business.

My state's laws require central storage of meds for summer camps. Here's an excerpt from our draft 160-2:

Medications for cadets (including both prescription and non-prescription medication as defined by this regulation), except those a physician prescribed for self-administration such as epi pens, inhalers, etc, shall be locked in a cabinet, box, or drawer or stored in a safe place inaccessible to cadets (410 IAC 6-7.2-17, e).  Prescription medication containers will have their original labels attached. 

I bolded the portion that is word for word from the state law, note that the red word was children in the law. These laws go into effect for an overnight activity that exceeds 72 hours.

No, they don't, at least not in a CAP cotext.

This statuate is specific to "Youth Camps", not generalized overnight activities.

410 IAC 6­7.2­14 "Youth camp" defined
Authority: IC 16-19-3-4
Affected: IC 16-19-3
Sec. 14. "Youth camp" means any area or tract of land established, operated, or maintained to provide more that
seventy-two (72) continuous hours of outdoor group living experiences away from established residences for
educational, recreational, sectarian, or health purposes to ten (10) or more children who are under eighteen (18)
years of age and not accompanied by a parent or guardian.

You also can't generalize "children" to "cadets", since we have cadets over 18 who are not covered by this.

Though called "encampments", there are currently no CAP encampments which occur in outdoor settings.  NESA, HMRS, or maybe
CSS might have something that long, but not encampments.

Regardless, CAP regs don't trump state or federal law, so in those cases a Wing JAG would probably need to get involved and
decide what has to be done...

...except...

...since many encampments occur on federal military installations, what the state wants might, or might not be, irrelevant - again
a job for the JAGs.

Our encampment occurs on a National Guard facility. That would make it state would it not?

[Eclipse]

Our encampment occurs on a National Guard facility. That would make it state would it not?

Yes, but its not a "youth camp" as defined by the statute.

[RiverAux]

Every youth camp I've heard of outside of some Boy Scout activities has had some sort of cabins where the kids stay.  I have a hard time believing someone would write such a statute too basically apply to people that are out camping.  But, legislatures have done things much sillier than that too. 

[Eclipse]

It clearly says "outdoor"...

[davidsinn]

It clearly says "outdoor"...

And the second amendment clearly says "shall not be infringed" but governments at all levels have no problem reinterpreting that do they? We have a legislative squadron and a good JA at the wing level so I'm pretty sure this has been hashed out pretty good before the supplement went out for comment.

[Major Lord]

I am not sure how many encampments have taken place since this  change took effect. Does anyone have any direct experience of how the policy played out? I am going to take a wild guess that National would not choose to share with the general membership any open civil litigation (or I.G. Complaint, since a CAP "gag order" is generally placed on these) arising from our new policy, other than as a refinement to the initial policy in the form of an ICL or other mechanism. On the other hand, I have not heard of anyone dying at an encampment or other activity, or any CAP- badgers going postal ( although they don't seem to do rifles much anymore I have heard) So I guess we will have to let the policy be time-tested to see if it results in dramatic, or just routine, problems.

Major Lord

[Major Lord]

It clearly says "outdoor"...

And the second amendment clearly says "shall not be infringed" but governments at all levels have no problem reinterpreting that do they? We have a legislative squadron and a good JA at the wing level so I'm pretty sure this has been hashed out pretty good before the supplement went out for comment.

The Constitution is more of a "guideline" than an actual set of laws binding Congress.........I still stand by the quote that "The Constitution was written in language so clear, that only a lawyer could misunderstand it".

Major Lord

[Eclipse]

I am not sure how many encampments have taken place since this  change took effect.

This policy has been effect by ICL since last Jan 1 (2010), so there's been at least one cycle for every major activity since then, we've dealt with it twice.

For us it was status quo other than where the meds physically were.  We still tracked them and require the cadets report the meds had been taken.
There was also no change in the percentage of cadets paying attention to their own needs - most did, some had to be reminded, and others you wonder sometimes how they get through the day without help.

I'm not aware of any activities in my wing which were negatively affected by this issue.

[cap235629]

It clearly says "outdoor"...

And the second amendment clearly says "shall not be infringed" but governments at all levels have no problem reinterpreting that do they? We have a legislative squadron and a good JA at the wing level so I'm pretty sure this has been hashed out pretty good before the supplement went out for comment.

The Constitution is more of a "guideline" than an actual set of laws binding Congress.........I still stand by the quote that "The Constitution was written in language so clear, that only a lawyer could misunderstand it".

Major Lord

Please tell me you are joking.  The Bill of Rights is as ambiguous as the 10 commandments....

[RiverAux]

You must have missed the 200+ years of cases before the Supreme Court where they have tried to clear up the ambiguities.   

Now that I think about it, the 10 commandments aren't exactly clear-cut either.  For example, "Thou shalt not kill" is pretty clear, but yet church scholars have invented plenty of ways that it can be done. 

The point is that no law or regulation will EVER be so perfectly clear so as to avoid situations where it isn't exactly clear how it should apply in that case.

[Major Lord]

Not to hijack the thread, but the B.O. R. is very clear, especially to anyone who has read the Federalist Papers and studied the original intent. It is clear that people try to muddy the intent using new construction, but there is little ambiguity to these simple declarative sentences. It says what it means and it means what it says. Even straining at the smallest gnat, the words " Congress Shall Make no Law" are as clear as a bell.  Eclipses' comparison to the Commandments is not solid. Firstly, the Commandment says "Thou shalt not Murder" ( The Hebrew word is "Retsach" ) Not "Thou Shalt not Kill" a very different interpretation, buts its easier to fudge a word from an ancient language than a modern language still in common use.  Secondly, unlike the Bible, (or Pentateuch)  we have the written opinions describing the specific original intent of every aspect of the Constitution, and a Common Law basis with which to test and interpret it.

Major Lord

[cap235629]

Not to hijack the thread, but the B.O. R. is very clear, especially to anyone who has read the Federalist Papers and studied the original intent. It is clear that people try to muddy the intent using new construction, but there is little ambiguity to these simple declarative sentences. It says what it means and it means what it says. Even straining at the smallest gnat, the words " Congress Shall Make no Law" are as clear as a bell.  Eclipses' comparison to the Commandments is not solid. Firstly, the Commandment says "Thou shalt not Murder" ( The Hebrew word is "Retsach" ) Not "Thou Shalt not Kill" a very different interpretation, buts its easier to fudge a word from an ancient language than a modern language still in common use.  Secondly, unlike the Bible, (or Pentateuch)  we have the written opinions describing the specific original intent of every aspect of the Constitution, and a Common Law basis with which to test and interpret it.

Major Lord

so you were joking... whew....