Ambulance no-go zones: 'Clearly there is a real need to provide cover'

IT goes without saying that attacks on emergency service personnel going about their business are entirely unacceptable.

The question is: what do we do about it?

The easiest part of that question to answer is how we take care of such workers, especially ambulance and fire service staff who should not be expected to have to protect themselves.

In an ideal world, police would always be able to offer that protection. But this is impractical, as police numbers are already stretched without patrol cars riding shotgun every time an ambulance or a fire tender is called out to a remotely dodgy area.

It is shocking that we even have to consider such an option – though clearly there is a real need to provide such cover.

About once a month a Lothians paramedic is attacked as they respond to emergency calls. Incidents have included staff being kicked and bitten, and "spit kits" are being issued so DNA can be used to pursue attackers.

Also, there were 12 missile attacks and two verbal assaults on fire crews in the Lothians last year – and twice as many the year before, including four direct physical attacks.

Such assaults are mindless and immoral, and are not acceptable on men and women with some of the most difficult jobs around.

So no wonder that sometimes the emergency services are unwilling to respond. As we report today, there are more than 50 Lothian addresses which ambulance crews refuse to visit without a police escort.

This is a difficult call, especially if a 999 operator is faced with what seems to be a genuine emergency. But if the residents have previously been aggressive to paramedics then they have forfeited the right to expect as good a service as the rest of the population.

Clearly, care is needed to ensure that the right addresses are marked – and that no new residents suffer because of those who lived there before. Also, no-one should be yellow-carded because they are regarded as nuisances for making regular calls.

All emergencies should be responded to, but it is only right that paramedics are protected, even if it means those who may be a threat waiting a few minutes for police to become available.

But should we go further and refuse all emergency care to society's thugs, including those who threaten hospital staff?

That's an even harder call, but there is a case for refusing help to the worst offenders. After all, those who respect mercy men and women have nothing to fear.