new cadet meds Reg....

[NCRblues]

http://www.capmembers.com/media/cms/R160_002_3D0E53BA5F1A5.pdf

just thought i would post it...

[Dad2-4]

My first thought is...YAY!! Relieves SM staff of direct responsibilty. But care must be given to ensure parents clearly understand the reg before activities, especially encampments or other overnight events, and that instructions/permissions are included in application forms.

[cap235629]

My first thought is...YAY!! Relieves SM staff of direct responsibilty. But care must be given to ensure parents clearly understand the reg before activities, especially encampments or other overnight events, and that instructions/permissions are included in application forms.

I think giving parents a copy of this regulation with the encampment or other activity appplication should suffice.

[Major Lord]

Sweet mother of Buddha, they think this kind of thinking will help? First, if a Cadet attends a Squadron meeting without first presenting written permission to CAP to allow the child to be in possession of a valid, lawful, and licit prescription drug, they (everyone!)  is in violation of the policy.

In one breath, Seniors are advised that assuming control of possession or distribution may be done at that Senior's own risk- in other sections, foreknowledge that this will happen, including passive monitoring or actively inventorying the Cadets medications is clearly understood. This is a much more ambiguous policy than the drafters intended (Please god, tell me we have better lawyers than this representing our organization) The policy is unclear, unrealistic ( Lets' 2B a cadet for sharing his Vitamin C Glucose candy) and attempts to control the situation without accepting any of the actual responsibility. It won't stand up. 

For those people who have a lawful duty to act, it does nothing, except to try and focus any potential liability on the Senior. It states that the Wings will issue classification of how and when, and to whom this applies. Assuming that they do this properly, ( Our Wing thinks you need a Class B drivers' license to drive a Van!) an imprudent assumption to make, we will have 57 different policies varying on which side of a line your feet happen to be on.

Imagine going into court and having to explain to a judge that you as USAF-AUX "Medical Officer" watched a badger have a melt down from forgetting to takes 4 days of Ritalin  but CAP rules would not permit you to adopt medical control of a minor in your care.

Do you really think that sending home notification to mom and dad pinned to Johnny's shirt is going to be accepted as full disclosure and acceptance?

Dear Mom and Dad,

Please sign below indicating which drugs your kid takes ( we promise not to tell the Air Force when they try to Enlist or Commission) Please note that signing this form means that only people who have can articulate a legal duty to act will do so (unless they have Joined the Wisconsin Reps in Illinois and can't be found)  but the rest of non-medical people will try our level best to call 911 if we recognize one of thousands of possible medical problems that may arise from failing to take , or overdosing, from, my lawfully prescribed medication, clear instructions for use of which are printed on the front label. Further, That you hold CAP harmless against any and all actions and damages arising from actions or failings, or those of its members.

Enigo Montoya, MAJGEN USAFAUX
Joo killed my father;prepare to die!

Cadet Programs people will be the most at risk, next to the Corp itself.  Good luck with that, I will try to sit in on your trial.

Major Lord

[NCRblues]

Sweet mother of Buddha, they think this kind of thinking will help? First, if a Cadet attends a Squadron meeting without first presenting written permission to CAP to allow the child to be in possession of a valid, lawful, and licit prescription drug, they (everyone!)  is in violation of the policy.

In one breath, Seniors are advised that assuming control of possession or distribution may be done at that Senior's own risk- in other sections, foreknowledge that this will happen, including passive monitoring or actively inventorying the Cadets medications is clearly understood. This is a much more ambiguous policy than the drafters intended (Please god, tell me we have better lawyers than this representing our organization) The policy is unclear, unrealistic ( Lets' 2B a cadet for sharing his Vitamin C Glucose candy) and attempts to control the situation without accepting any of the actual responsibility. It won't stand up. 

For those people who have a lawful duty to act, it does nothing, except to try and focus any potential liability on the Senior. It states that the Wings will issue classification of how and when, and to whom this applies. Assuming that they do this properly, ( Our Wing thinks you need a Class B drivers' license to drive a Van!) an imprudent assumption to make, we will have 57 different policies varying on which side of a line your feet happen to be on.

Imagine going into court and having to explain to a judge that you as USAF-AUX "Medical Officer" watched a badger have a melt down from forgetting to takes 4 days of Ritalin  but CAP rules would not permit you to adopt medical control of a minor in your care.

Do you really think that sending home notification to mom and dad pinned to Johnny's shirt is going to be accepted as full disclosure and acceptance?

Dear Mom and Dad,

Please sign below indicating which drugs your kid takes ( we promise not to tell the Air Force when they try to Enlist or Commission) Please note that signing this form means that only people who have can articulate a legal duty to act will do so (unless they have Joined the Wisconsin Reps in Illinois and can't be found)  but the rest of non-medical people will try our level best to call 911 if we recognize one of thousands of possible medical problems that may arise from failing to take , or overdosing, from, my lawfully prescribed medication, clear instructions for use of which are printed on the front label. Further, That you hold CAP harmless against any and all actions and damages arising from actions or failings, or those of its members.

Enigo Montoya, MAJGEN USAFAUX
Joo killed my father;prepare to die!

Cadet Programs people will be the most at risk, next to the Corp itself.  Good luck with that, I will try to sit in on your trial.

Major Lord

i did not think of it this way, but you made me think. It is very open ended for a "legal regulation".

I was also shocked that this went out so close to this years NCSA's, this means that those wings that are holding NCSA's basically must have there supplement done and reviewed by national before the kids can show up there. This puts an amazing amount of pressure on wing kings/queens and staff, and also on NCSA directors, medical officers, TAC, well anyone involved really.

[RiverAux]

Wow, is that confusing.  Glad I don't have to actually figure out what it means. 

[jks19714]

I think that we have found the whereabouts of the legal team who wrote the "don't ask, don't tell" regulations.

[Ned]

Sweet mother of Buddha, they think this kind of thinking will help?

Yes, "they" do.  This regulations is way overdue and provides needed guidance to folks actually administering the CP in the field.

First, if a Cadet attends a Squadron meeting without first presenting written permission to CAP to allow the child to be in possession of a valid, lawful, and licit prescription drug, they (everyone!)  is in violation of the policy.

Of course not, and no more realistic than proclaiming that the encampment cook violates the CPP when a cadet flight sergeant hazes another cadet.

For the first time, the responsibility for possession and administration of cadet medications is where it belongs - with the cadet who needs the medication and has been dealing with the health problem since well before the activity.  And not with some well-intentioned but unqualified senior member.

In one breath, Seniors are advised that assuming control of possession or distribution may be done at that Senior's own risk- in other sections, foreknowledge that this will happen, including passive monitoring or actively inventorying the Cadets medications is clearly understood. This is a much more ambiguous policy than the drafters intended (Please god, tell me we have better lawyers than this representing our organization)

Of course any regulation could be written more clearly, and this one is the product of a lot of experienced hands.  It was originally drafted by Dr. Kay McLaughlin, a Spaatz cadet and physician.  (And the National Health Services Officer.)  It went through a lot of drafts in committee, and then the lawyers had their crack at it.  It represents a solid, commonsense solution to a difficult problem.

The policy is unclear, unrealistic ( Lets' 2B a cadet for sharing his Vitamin C Glucose candy) and attempts to control the situation without accepting any of the actual responsibility. It won't stand up. 

Stand up to what?  Spreading hyperbole in place of reasoned discussion is not helpful.

For those people who have a lawful duty to act, it does nothing, except to try and focus any potential liability on the Senior.

Really?  There is no change here whatsover.  If you had a legal duty to act before the regulation was published, you still have a legal duty to act after the regulation was published.  Nothing in the regulation changes that.  As it turns out, CAP is not generally liable for legally-required actions taken by members that were not in the course and scope of their CAP duties.  If we didn't mandate an action, train or certify a member to perform it, then we really aren't a party to it.

It states that the Wings will issue classification of how and when, and to whom this applies. Assuming that they do this properly, ( Our Wing thinks you need a Class B drivers' license to drive a Van!) an imprudent assumption to make, we will have 57 different policies varying on which side of a line your feet happen to be on.

Nonsense.  Supplements are only required where state laws are more restrictive.  That appears to be a fairly small minority of wings.  But even if you are 100% correct, we will have 57 different policies precisely because we needed to have 57 different policies as required by local law.  Sounds like a Good Thing to Know.

Imagine going into court and having to explain to a judge that you as USAF-AUX "Medical Officer" watched a badger have a melt down from forgetting to takes 4 days of Ritalin  but CAP rules would not permit you to adopt medical control of a minor in your care.

OK, I've got a pretty good imagination.  Now what?  What was your point?

Any member of CAP confronted with a medical emergency can and should take action - even if that emergency is prompted by an over or under-dose of prescribed medications.  Restated, everyone can call "911" when necessary.

Cadet Programs people will be the most at risk, next to the Corp itself.  Good luck with that, I will try to sit in on your trial.

Major Lord

You're welcome to sit in on any of my trials.  Drop by anytime.  I've usually got one going on.

Ned Lee
Former Legal Officer

[NCRblues]

Ned, got a question for you.

I have been looking through the NB past meeting minuets, and i cant seem to find when the NB voted on this...

So, did they?

Or, do they have to?

and if they did not, can the national commander just make up a regulation?

Maybe i just cant find it...

[coudano]

waiting patiently for medical discrimination of applicants

"ew johnny has drugs, that's a giant hastle... pick someone else"

[Eclipse]

My encampment Health and Safety staff reviewed it and feel it does not change anything from our ops normal
(though we have been operating under these guidelines since early 2010).

There's plenty in there to make hay about in a coffee shop, not much change to status quo.

IMHO the only people that are going to have trouble with this are the ones still running triage units that have "Cadet Medical Officers", etc.
But they already have other issues of fundamental program compliance, anyway, so this isn't going to be the most important thing on the pile.

We will use ORM to be as safe as possible, take steps to avoid the hazing trap, and keep Sean Kingston's number handy for the rare need.

[NCRblues]

My encampment Health and Safety staff reviewed it and feel it does not change anything from our ops normal
(though we have been operating under these guidelines since early 2010).

There's plenty in there to make hay about in a coffee shop, not much change to status quo.

IMHO the only people that are going to have trouble with this are the ones still running triage units that have "Cadet Medical Officers", etc.
But they already have other issues of fundamental program compliance, anyway, so this isn't going to be the most important thing on the pile.

We will use ORM to be as safe as possible, take steps to avoid the hazing trap, and keep Sean Kingston's number handy for the rare need.

So, i am just guessing, Illinois does not have to come up with a wing supplement then?

[Eclipse]

So, i am just guessing, Illinois does not have to come up with a wing supplement then?

Not that I am aware of - things seem pretty clear in there.

[Ned]

Ned, got a question for you.

I have been looking through the NB past meeting minuets, and i cant seem to find when the NB voted on this...

I am away from my notes, but IIRC it was an NEC thing, not a NB thing.

I can be more specific when I get home from DC.

[Eclipse]

The 2009 National Board approved the policy effective 1 JAN 2010 (which is, of course, how all encampments operated last year, right?).

I assume the regulation is just the administrative process of that approval.

[EMT-83]

Back in December, I posed the question in another thread about any reported problems in the year since the ICL went into effect.

Not one response.

http://captalk.net/index.php?topic=11917.msg218631#msg218631

[FARRIER]

     Clear to me. Way I read it is, its primarily the kids responsibility or his parents, if they need to attend the activity. Anything outside the prescribed meds, get the parents permission. If the kid is unable to handle it, as said before, parent attends or the kid doesn't attend.

     I had a nephew, when he was 15, who was in that situation, attend a week long Bible Camp. My Mom (his grandmother) went along to make sure he took his meds, because we knew he wasn't responsible enough to keep track himself. We worked the organizers of the Bible Camp ahead of time. The only issue was the cost I had to cover for both him and his grandmother.

Respectfully,

[sarmed1]

Acceptable practice vs trying to circumvent the reg?

Medication
All prescription and over-the-counter medication MUST be retained in their original bottle with dosing instructions and hand carried to in-processing.  Your cadet will go over their medication and medical needs with the Medical Officer prior to being allowed into the ENC area.

Medication will be kept in the Medical Operations Building which is open and staffed 24/7.  Just as in school or at home, each cadet is expected to be responsible for staying on their normal medication dosage routine.  Any cadet who needs to have an EPI pen should either bring two or bring their prescription so that if they need to use it, another pen can be issued.

National Headquarters Civil Air Patrol has recently changed the way that cadet medication is handled at all CAP activities requiring changes in policy, procedure, and paperwork.  More information will be posted as it becomes available.  All parents and cadet attending the school should reference CAPR 52-16: Cadet Program Management and CAPR 160-2: Handling Cadet Medications.

Any questions or concerns about anything related to medication or medical needs should be addressed with the Medical Officer prior to the start of ENC. To contact them, please visit the contact page.

Ok so I found this an a wings enacmpment page; So I looked again; and yes it does say cadets areresponsible for storing their own medications, it does not say that activities CAN'T store them in a centralized location (ie collect them).  If the medical operations builidng is open 24/7 and in theory a cadet is actually allowed to go there at anytime to get medication (prescrption or OTC) is this within the law of the reg? Personally I see it as someones gray area/way around the reg for HSO's/commanders that arent 100% comfortable with cadets handling their own meds....

thoughts?

mk

[Spaceman3750]

Acceptable practice vs trying to circumvent the reg?

Medication
All prescription and over-the-counter medication MUST be retained in their original bottle with dosing instructions and hand carried to in-processing.  Your cadet will go over their medication and medical needs with the Medical Officer prior to being allowed into the ENC area.

Medication will be kept in the Medical Operations Building which is open and staffed 24/7.  Just as in school or at home, each cadet is expected to be responsible for staying on their normal medication dosage routine.  Any cadet who needs to have an EPI pen should either bring two or bring their prescription so that if they need to use it, another pen can be issued.

National Headquarters Civil Air Patrol has recently changed the way that cadet medication is handled at all CAP activities requiring changes in policy, procedure, and paperwork.  More information will be posted as it becomes available.  All parents and cadet attending the school should reference CAPR 52-16: Cadet Program Management and CAPR 160-2: Handling Cadet Medications.

Any questions or concerns about anything related to medication or medical needs should be addressed with the Medical Officer prior to the start of ENC. To contact them, please visit the contact page.

... arent 100% comfortable with cadets handling their own meds....

thoughts?

mk

It's been said before and said again - if a cadet can't deal with his own medications why are they there? By the time you're in middle school (or above) you should be able to know when to take your meds and then follow through with that.

[Eclipse]

Yes, you should, but the fact remains that many cadets can't, won't, or "other".  For those who ask how the kids can get through school fine but
need us one week of the year - the schools have full involvement with any meds the kids take, monitor the situation, and have more leeway in intervention and treatment when there is an issue.  They are also not away from home and parents for a week at a time.  If Johnny forgets his meds,
it isn't 12 hours round trip to get them, and mom or dad will notice he's not "right" by dinner.

We've had cadets with injectables that required special storage fail to mention this at all, nor accommodate the sharps, and others who lose track of their meds and not mention it for a full day.

This is discussed in TLC - for kids at cadet age, long term planning is 3 weeks, couple that mentality with a new environment and maybe being away from home for the first time, and you see why the adults need to, at least, have a verifiable way to insure the cadets are managing things properly.

And neither of the above includes cadets who refuse to take their meds, share them, or who have a "dramatic personal life" which may include parents fighting about whether their kids should even take the meds, and not telling us on purpose.

We also have the pendulum which swings from "helicopter" to "disinterested" - the Helicopters are micro managing their kids to the point where their every need and want is accommodated for them, including meds, and the kids never think about it because mom is there 3 times daily with pill and water, and then the "disinterested" who don't even understand what their kids are taking, let alone care to be involved.  Both types have a right to
be an encampment, and need someone to make sure they are safe.

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.

[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....

[Major Lord]

OOOhhhhhh....Yes, about the "Guidelines" part. Unfortunately, the Government disagrees with me and believes that the B.O.R. is only operative when it creates no inconvenience for the Governments' demand of unlimited power.

Major Lord

[sarmed1]

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?Major Lord

HMRS changed their policy on meds last year; all participating members with prescription meds are Id'd during inprocessing and recorded in a log book.  Squadron staff are made aware of specific medication needs of their assigned personnel; each med consuming member has a log sheet that the squadron commander or his designee basically signs off that the member took thier medication.  Those with fridge needs store them in the medical building and come to take them on thier schedule.  Those with OTC's carry them with them and take them under the same guidelines (obviously with all of the 160-2...mom permession, regular container etc, etc..... if they dont have thir own mommy and daddy get a call and are given an appropriate medication based on mommy and daddy's permission.

Despte the "high stress" of HMRS no one tried to kill themselves (that we know of) and despite thier being no locakble tents there were no reports of medication thefts and no one reported finding a group of students stoned out of their minds due to inappropraite sharing.....

mk

[Major Lord]

It sounds like you are "administering" the program. The new policy reads in part:

" Consequently, CAP members are not permitted to function as pharmacists, physicians, nurses, or
in any other role that would permit the administration and dispensing of drugs"

To me, it sounds very much like the activity is accepting the role of monitoring and controlling the drugs. Is this variance from the regulation due to local laws or policies, or is this how the activity interpreted the new policy? Either way, I am glad that you have not had any meltdowns.

Major Lord

[Eclipse]

It sounds like you are "administering" the program. The new policy reads in part:

" Consequently, CAP members are not permitted to function as pharmacists, physicians, nurses, or
in any other role that would permit the administration and dispensing of drugs"

To me, it sounds very much like the activity is accepting the role of monitoring and controlling the drugs. Is this variance from the regulation due to local laws or policies, or is this how the activity interpreted the new policy? Either way, I am glad that you have not had any meltdowns.

Major Lord

Yes, in part, but it is important to read the entire reg:
(160-2)

a.  A CAP senior member, after obtaining all the necessary information and receiving
documentation of the written permission from a  minor cadet's parent or guardian for the
administration of prescription medication during the activity, can agree to accept the
responsibility of making sure the minor cadet is reminded to take any prescribed medication at
the times and in the frequencies prescribed; however, no senior member will be required or
encouraged to do so.  This regulation does not  prohibit senior member staff from monitoring
medication compliance with directly observed  medication ingestion, having medication forms
for the cadet to initial when doses were taken, performing pill counts, or other compliance
verification.

[Major Lord]

Yes, you are right. My bad.

Major Lord

[sarmed1]

That policy is based directly on intepretation of the reg.  No local law/requirements for PA camps as relates to medication administration. 

mk

[mmizner]

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

Yes the past few CAWG encampments have run this way.  To my knowledge it has worked great. (approx 300 cadets each year)

[RADIOMAN015]

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.

Well I think most of us are in agreement that epi pens & inhalers, as well as other emergency type medication does need to be carried by the individual (cadet or senior) who may need them and we need to be aware of the issues that will require the use my the member.

Personally, I would have no problem IF I ran into a medical issue requiring my epi pen but couldn't do it myself, IF another member took the pen and jabbed me in the appropriate location to save me.    That is the RIGHT thing to do for anyone and I highly doubt that anyone is going to get in trouble for helping in this sort of a situation.

(Hmm now I'm looking where the heck I put my epi pens cause the bees are coming out )  I might also carry some meat tenderizer since IF this is used as a paste immediately on the bite it will remove much of venom and may actually prevent a more serious medical condition from developing BUT if you have had an allergic reaction to a bee sting make sure you've got your epi pen with you because the next bite/sting might be your last
RM   

[Johnny Yuma]

More FAIL from NHQ, Incorporated...

This is going to make encampments very interesting. Some of these kids are on some heavy duty meds that you really don't want laying around in the barracks. We can pretty much kiss encampments goodbye when (not if) some kid steals another's psyche meds and either OD's or has a violent episode.

[PHall]

More FAIL from NHQ, Incorporated...

This is going to make encampments very interesting. Some of these kids are on some heavy duty meds that you really don't want laying around in the barracks. We can pretty much kiss encampments goodbye when (not if) some kid steals another's psyche meds and either OD's or has a violent episode.

Cadets have been taking care of their own meds in CAWG for over five years now and we haven't had any theft problems whatsoever.
The only thing the TAC Officers have had to do is verify/remind cadets to take their meds. Most of them have been taking them for awhile and it's not a problem.

[sarmed1]

More FAIL from NHQ, Incorporated...

This is going to make encampments very interesting. Some of these kids are on some heavy duty meds that you really don't want laying around in the barracks. We can pretty much kiss encampments goodbye when (not if) some kid steals another's psyche meds and either OD's or has a violent episode.

That has been the concern of most HSO's; however as has been pointed out that in the umpteen years of encampments there hasnt been a single documented (ie safety report) case of this happening, SO obviously it isnt a problem and everything will be ok...............

yeah like most :...dont worry this will never happen...." instances in CAP....someone is gonna screw it up.....

mk

[Ned]

More FAIL from NHQ, Incorporated (...)

We can pretty much kiss encampments goodbye when (not if) some kid steals another's psyche meds and either OD's or has a violent episode.

Oddly enough, somehow our successful encampment program has survived this (largely imaginary) threat for over 60 years.

We have had over a thousand encampments involving hundreds of thousands of cadets over the years.  Sadly, sometimes cadets have had things stolen from them in the barracks, sometimes cadets have had bad drug reactions, and sometimes cadets (and seniors) have even "lost it" and become violent.

And yet the encampment program goes on.  Cadets get trained, grow, and mature because of what we do.

And encampments are safe.  Mostly because we have mature, responsible CP officers to mentor and safeguard our cadets.  They take appropriate actions to prevent problems, and prevent small problems from become big ones.

[Patterson]

^ Very well said!

The only documented instance of anyone "stealing prescription meds and getting high", took place in 1991.  A Cadet who was working in the "medical section" during an Encampment stole the keys to the lock box, and took a few pills from each prescription bottle inside. 

It was only discovered when the CAP Senior Member running the medical section spilled a prescription, she went to work on counting the pills to make sure she cleaned them all up.  Surprised that the prescription bottle read as "just refilled" the night before Encampment began, yet 7 pills short. 

So in all CAP-like style, a sting was setup and the Cadet in question was caught.  He was immediately turned over to the Military Police, turned over to the Federal Magistrate and served some time in some juvenile camp.

Needless to say, lets all not get bent out of shape over the "new rules" here.  Things happen, and no matter how well you plan for situations, events transpire in ways you may not even think they could.

As far as dispensing meds to Cadets, I would never do that.  I don't even want to be associated with medications or in the same room.  Some Parents may be devious and hope everyday they can get rich of of a lawsuit, for whatever reason.

[Eclipse]

The only documented instance of anyone "stealing prescription meds and getting high", took place in 1991.  A Cadet who was working in the "medical section" during an Encampment stole the keys to the lock box, and took a few pills from each prescription bottle inside.

Documented where?  I have no issue with the new procedures and policies but I doubt that in the last twenty years anyone can
say anything is "only documented" - that isn't the kind of thing they would put in CAP news.

We've had any number of "Fun!"  "Exciting!" things happen which were handled through channels but not made public.