GIVEN THE CONCERNS expressed about the well-being of Barbadians and visitors using popular beaches without the adequate presence of lifeguards, Thursday’s announcement that four lifeguards will be deployed at each of the 17 beaches supervised across Barbados was most welcome.
However, we must question whether this number is adequate and whether lifeguards should not be attached to an agency involved with rescue services, like the Barbados Fire Service or Barbados Ambulance Service, than being an adjunct of a statutory corporation focused on the environment.
Although their heroics rarely make the headlines, lifeguards in Barbados save scores of lives annually. That’s why the retrenchment of 28 of these individuals, along with the subsequent no-show at a few beaches by sympathising colleagues, was particularly worrisome.
The National Conservation Commission (NCC) sought to clarify the situation. According to its statement, the number of lifeguards prior to April 30 stood at 94, but was reduced to 66. Four senior lifeguards will be reassigned to reinforce the existing lifeguard complement at the 17 lifeguard supervised beaches, bringing the total to 70 lifeguards. Arithmetically, the proposal can work. But in reality, it does not add up when one factors in off days, sick days, vacation and compulsory training.
That is not good enough, given the accepted standards required for lifeguards to successfully carry out their duties.
Equally unsatisfactory is the fact that popular spots like Silver Sands beach; Foul Bay beach; Bottom Bay beach; River Bay, Barclays Park and Morgan Lewis beach are not supervised by lifeguards.
Government needs to recognise that employing qualified lifeguards is like paying for home insurance or firemen.
You pay for them to be there to assist you should you need their expertise, but quietly pray that nothing ever occurs that requires their use.
This policy of firing lifeguards to save costs has been examined in the United States, and the report Lifeguard Effectiveness: A Report Of The Working Group, published in October 2001 by the US Centers for Disease Control Injury Center, found that apart from benefitting public safety by saving lives, lowering drowning rates and preventing injuries in aquatic recreational environments, lifeguards also indirectly provide economic and social benefits. They add to the savings in emergency medical care and long-term hospital treatment involving cases of near-drowning, and alleviate emotional trauma and social costs to family and friends.
Our other point is that lifeguards are trained rescuers who must be certified before they can be employed as such. Cardio-pulmonary resuscitation (CPR) and general first aid are standard requirements for them. Also, many are now both trained and certified to use advanced lifesaving tools such as the external defibrillator and portable oxygen.
Clearly, individuals so trained are better suited to be attached to a specialised rescue service than to the NCC.
It is time to recognise lifeguards for their expertise and to treat the service they provide as essential as that of paramedics and firemen.