Whilst those in the front seat comment on the first aid, may a doctor comment on the aviation ?
In the civilian systems I have worked, the management decided what was accepted. I presume here HMG has decided to provide SAR whenever the ground services feel it needed
The doctor has then decided whether there is a clinical need and if so passed the request to the aircrew. The pilot has decided whether the flight can be undertaken but he (she) has not been told who the patient is nor why they need transportation. Equally the medical crew has never been told of any aviation issues such as deteriorating weather, maintenance etc. This Chinese wall has not been foolproof but has IMHO reduced risk. We didnt launch if there was a risk.
This is not unique to aviation services in medicine. Whenever I attend a road traffic accident I am obliged not to put myself or my team at risk. I do not cross a motorway even if a patient dies just feet away. I do not attend a patient if the traffic is not controlled. We do not have heroes.
Accepting that the media juice everything up, surely the mission was either OK to fly or not. There is always some risk but it must be acceptable. We are talking about a civilian patient requesting NHS care, not a theatre of war, nor a sinking ship. Do you really launch and push the boundary because it is a sick patient??? The patient's pathology was irrelevant...... If you wouldnt position for maintenance in that weather should you launch for a patient....