How do we know what the Helicopter Crew was "thinking"?
Is there a Investigative Report available for this event that has findings for that?
We have the one news article linked reporting the settlement of the Civil Suit.
What stands out to me from that article is the following statement.
The claim was signed by lawyer K Thomas Slack, who stated that Metro ‘did not want to be taken off the trail by helicopter’ after an evaluation found that she did not need any kind of emergency transport. Slack added that despite this, the city fire department had decided to use a helicopter over any form of ground transportation.
I see more far more problems than a terribly bad Winching.....as bad as that was....the insistence by the Ground Units the Patient be Winched is the main problem that set up the failure by the Helicopter Crew.
The question that should be addressed is just why that happened....how far was it to a site where the Helicopter could be landed and the Patient ground loaded?
If it had been a Private EMS operator and the Patient refused Air Transport....that would have ended it right there and she would have gone by ground.
What Authority does the Fire Department and EMS have to overrule that Patient Refusal especially in light of her not having any critical need for transport?
Was the Helicopter Crew advised of the patient's refusal?
If so did the Crew look for a ground landing site adjacent to where the patient was located?
What alternatives were available for moving the patient by Winch?