Just out of curiousity
 

In another thread I set up my belief that very few people who were police and fire would stay at their posts during and immediately following the hurricane in NO. My argument is that these people have families and would most likely leave their posts to make sure their families are ok and to be there for them.

Keep in mind 99% of these firefighters and police have probably never gone through anything like this, have never seen anything like this and if they trained for this, training is one thing, in reality, the horrid effects and the true stress will cause reactions to differ.

This is a huge reason we need FEMA to respond faster as they are more likely to be able to operate without having families in the danger zone and are trained far better to respond to these events.

Please answer the poll honestly, answer it as if you had been there in the post of the police or fire departments. It'll be easy to say "I'd stay the course and expect everyone of my coworkers to" when you have not truly been through this.....

Stay at my post. Sorry, but as any soldier who has ever served knows, you sign up to do a job, to protect the nation (or in this case, a state or community), not to look after individuals - whether you are officially military or in a position such as a police officer or firefighter or even an emergnecy room doctor, you gotta stay. It's hard, but if you don't think you can do that, don't be a cop or firefighter, and certainly, don't join the military.

I'd like to believe I would stay at my post.

1) I would have evacuated my family.
2) Knowing a disaster was about to happen and that I would be working long hours, I would have made arrangements
3) If the worst happened and they were hurt or in danger, I would expect that someone could cover for me while I went to check on them but would return as quickly as possible.

In the capacity of a public servant such as law enforcement or firefighter, preparedness is your number one priority. That means if you KNOW that a hurricane is coming, you get your family out to safety immediately. That way you can concentrate on the job at hand and fulfill your duties as you accepted them.

Would've stayed at my post and understand the fact that some of my coworkers left to protect their families. I would've chose the Leave my post to check up on my family but since I don't have any of my own, then I'm good to stay at the post without working about any family members

You man your post in order to accomplish the greatest good possible. Of course it's a hard thing to do, but part of being a public servant is you must serve the public first and foremost.

I would do my duty, and expect no more of less of any colleague.

You forgot the 'Have my family safe before the storm hit because we all knew it was comming.' option.

repeat:

I would do my duty, and expect that every man would do the same.

other people can make side points about they wouldnt be in the situation, I can only answer as I would respond, my response is absolute, not relative.... of course I would want my family to be safe. But I would do my duty.

SF big words, but wait till you have children of your own before you leave them to the wilds while you 'do your duty' without thought or question.

My child was born almost a year ago, and let me tell you, life changes focus.

Family comes first. I would only come back if I knew my family was safe and ok.

That's my point, it is very easy to say "I wouldn't....." but if put in those circumstances.... well, I don't think anyone would truly know how they would react until put in them.

As for the option you mentioned above.... it's not an option as this assumes your family didn't get out before or it was a disaster that didn't have any warning (an earthquake, terrorist strike, etc.).

And remember if we are using NO as the prime example, you would be on mandatory duty to help the evacuation, therefore you may not know for sure your family got out as they are in a differing precinct.

I firmly believe it is mankind's nature to take care of his family first, in cases like these. but so far the poll is showing me wrong.

Pan, I have spent some time considering you question and the best that I can do is relate some personal experiences. First of all, Washington's environmental/weather threats are virtually unpredictable (earthquakes or severe storms) which fits your poll criteria. My second issue is that given that I am an older woman (I just can't bring myself to say "senior citizen"), my imaginary role in emergency response would likely be administrative. I'm not exactly the first person someone would call up to take physical action, but I am certain that I would be doing my job for whatever support role I could play, AFTER I secured my property and looked after my neighbors.

I know this because, in my real life we have had storm and earthquake damage:

- When we had extraordinary lake flooding a few years back (some yahoo decided to dam the outgoing creek), I checked on my absent neighbors properties. One was severely flooded and I contacted him at his home number in Seattle. (We share emergency numbers with each other here).

- After an extreme snow/ice and quick melt storm, another absent neighbor had a fallen tree take out his electricity. I contacted the utility for repair and then contacted my neighbor to tell him he had trees on his roof, with no apparent structural damage.

- After the Nisqually earthquake, all of the full time residents on my side of the lake checked in on each other to make sure everyone was safe. (Again, we keep a lookout for each other). Fortunately, the greatest concern was for the run away dogs that were frightened and we eventually found them and brought them home.

- This summer, with the assistance of the County Sheriff's Office, we formed a neighborhood "block" watch. (We have no blocks; just a couple miles of country road running down both sides of the lake). Again, we are looking after each other.

Pan, my rural circumstances may be unusual to your OP, but I do think that our effort to look after each other can be extended to a much larger community. In doing so, we might relieve the much needed response teams who are required in more drastically effected areas. I sincerely believe that we need to develop emergency response plans that begin at the neighborhood level. Why would FEMA or anyone else care about me or my neighbors, if Seattle has been turned into rubble?

And I have a child too - I can only answer as best I can, based on my own experience: I'd stay. I'd trust my wife and my brothers to get the family out of town, I need to stay and do my duty and work for the greater good and help the thousands in trouble. It's why I signed up, and I hope that's why cops and firefighters sign up too.

Got to agree family first.

It would be a big mistake for local communities to depend on the feds for fast response in a disaster. The first responders will almost always be local and that is probably when most lives will be saved. Most disasters are not predictable like the hurricanes. Police, Fire, and other rescue workers must stay on the job at least until the feds show up.

If I took the oath to serve and protect then I would stay on the job and still try to take care of my family. Hopefully people in these positions would have more information and access to resources than the average citizen and know how to use it to get both jobs done. Local communities must be able to depend on them in an emergency.

I would expect average citizens to go into the "every man for himself" mode but not our public safety and rescue workers. I would also expect them to take care of their families at the same time without abandoning the ship. They should have the knowledge and resources to do both. I don't think your "Sophie's Choice" type question is always applicable.

If I did abandon my post then I would expect to be discharged after the smoke clears.

From the land of Nelson no less...

I understand the oath (having taken it when I joined the Navy) and what is expected of you.

However, and this is why I highlighted the sentence I did.

I did not intend this question to be a cover blanket for everything, just MAJOR disasters of a degree where in a matter of minutes, hours your whole city is turned to rubble. The WTC while horrid, did not put in danger the whole of NYC, although it may have felt like it and people may have been scared, it was quite obvious there was a target and once hit, it was over.


This is more for NO or an earthquake or blizzard, where things hit so hard so fast there is very little time for anything.

Yes, there were warnings and evacuation warnings, however, no one knew how devestating it was going to be, the gridlock (if you remember) was horrendous much like Houston where cars were stopped on the freeways and no one was getting anywhere. Places gouged gas prices making it unaffordable to many to even attempt to try to get out.

This is why, in all honesty to me the bus issue is moot, because even had they been loaded they weren't going to make it very far and in the open, the 120+ MPH would have blown them around like toys .

And no, you can't solely rely on FEMA, you have to have a team of first responders in your city's forces..... however, the average cop and firefighter I would venture to say is not trained to be those, to train each and every one would be an expense that most cities probably could not afford.

And that is whom I am asking you to be, the average cop/firefighter caught in mandatory duty not knowing if your family is truly safe. (I believe I explained it above also).

As for being relieved of duty for leaving your post..... well chances are as we see in NO there isn't much of a job to go back to for some time.

Ditto.

This was seen coming long enough beforehand that I would have evacuated my girlfriend/wife (if I had one) WELL prior to this hitting, and then stay at my post for the duration.

I don't understand how people can be a firefighter, a police officer, or an EMS worker, sworn to protect and help, and just LEAVE because they want to be with their families. Just goes to show that for some people it's a job, and for others, it's their life.

...
 

Exactly what I would do. I would have been prepared. I really will never understand why all of these people didn't evacuate. Anyhoo, had I been irresponsible, I would have went home to make sure my family was safe, then returned to my post.

I'm a volunteer EMT/firefighter. The type of personality that becomes a professional first responder is the type that *loves* being able to help in these situations. In all weather emergencies I've seen, the county has tons of prep protocols, some might even say excessive amounts, to ensure that the first responders can be available for duty when they are needed. This includes provisions for the families.

The short answer is yes, of course I would stay, and I would trust the organization to take care of my family where I couldn't, just as I trust fellow firefighters to make sure I make it home safe after every shift.

If you're job is to help people, help people. This was New Orleans' time of need, and some ran. I'm not saying I don't understand it, but I consider it to be mildly cowardly.

It's your job; do it.
Organize your family well enough to see they're cared for. without you there Don't run from your life work.

I'd take care of my family first. This is a big reason why I would not accept this kind of job.

I would stay at my post because I would have had a family evacuation/care plan in place long before the disaster hit. It's called planning ahead.