Commanders to have "approval" over profiles?

[deleted480308]

Hey all, this sounds too crazy to be true but I was hearing at drill that one of the proposals coming down the pipe is that profiles assigned by medical providers will become subject to the line commander's approval...as in, a non-medical officer that oversees each soldier would have veto power over any profile assessed by a physician.

Can anyone confirm/deny this? Is this one of those grapevine stories that gets a little more ridiculous everytime someone repeats it?

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[backrow]

This has always been the case for the Navy. Staff officers (eg Medical Corps) provide recommendations that the line officer then gets to decide whether to follow or not. The reality is that it is extremely rare to see a CO go against a medical recommendation because they know exactly whose rear will be on the line if they choose to ignore the advice and something bad happens.


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile app

 

[pgg]

It's alway been that way.

It's a power seldom exercised though.

 

[deleted480308]

It's alway been that way.

It's a power seldom exercised though.

I guess that makes sense...it would be somewhat against the character of the military to have a medical captain overrule orders of someone higher like a colonel. This still lets it be the ranking officer's call....but makes it a buyer beware type of situation

 

[jabreal00]

Hey all, this sounds too crazy to be true but I was hearing at drill that one of the proposals coming down the pipe is that profiles assigned by medical providers will become subject to the line commander's approval...as in, a non-medical officer that oversees each soldier would have veto power over any profile assessed by a physician.

Can anyone confirm/deny this? Is this one of those grapevine stories that gets a little more ridiculous everytime someone repeats it?

Always been that way. A company, battalion or brigade commander can use a PROFILE signed by a medical professional as toilet paper if they wanted to. In reality they generally follow the PROFILE.

 

[Slevin]

It's part of the army's new medical readiness transformation. A profile is written and it goes on the commanders dashboard for them to take a look at, if they have questions they can go back and email the profiling officer. Saves me the hassle of having to email the speciality providers about their profiles.


New system goes live in the army June 1


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Slevin]

This is already basically how e-profile works. Seems like they're trying to push it all into one site. Right now, I can see a Soldier has a profile in the main medpros site, but have to log into e-profile and search for the profile to see what it says.

I also read this: http://armypubs.army.mil/epubs/pdf/ad2016_07.pdf which has a bunch of changes for medical readiness coming in June.

Sorta. The new system forces the commander to review it within 24-48 hours. And when you email the profiling officer the message is sent though the new profiling system not though outlook.

Also on the profiles it auto calculates the total number of days on profiles within the last 180-360 days, there is none of the count resetting if no profile issued within the last 30 days.

All profiles are listed on one document, current profile, perm profile and expired profiles.

It looks like it'll be a better system than what the army has now

 

[DeadCactus]

One of the most unique aspects of military medicine is that the patient is not the priority. The mission, whatever it may be at the time, is the priority and healthcare is provided solely to maintain a force capable of completing the mission.

 

[Homunculus]

not sure about other people's experiences but it wasn't the commanding officers i had the difficulty with-- it was the damn SGMs and 1SGs who would blow in periodically to second guess all my profiles. being the pragmatist i am i would usually just tell them "look, this is my recommendation, if you want to do x, y or z with this guy that's cool but it's on you." have yet to have one "vetoed"-- even shave profiles for PFB.

--your friendly would you rather have him a little beard-ey and doing his job or sent back for a preventable skin infection? caveman

 

[HighPriest]

not sure about other people's experiences but it wasn't the commanding officers i had the difficulty with-- it was the damn SGMs and 1SGs who would blow in periodically to second guess all my profiles. being the pragmatist i am i would usually just tell them "look, this is my recommendation, if you want to do x, y or z with this guy that's cool but it's on you." have yet to have one "vetoed"-- even shave profiles for PFB.

--your friendly would you rather have him a little beard-ey and doing his job or sent back for a preventable skin infection? caveman

My experience as well. I think I've spoken with one company commander, who's response to my explanation was "yep, that sounds right." But nothing shuts down an NCO like telling them they're responsible if they go AMA.

 

[callendm]

The issues with profiles are external from medical knowledge. They are leadership issues and a profile is just a recommendation to command. It is really no big deal.

"But Doc you said he can lift 25 pounds. Can you change it to 30 pounds because we have this drill and 30 pounds is what we are using...."

My response is always hey 1SG That's on you "Top"...(I went to school for eight years and trained for six more years for this, slams head down)