correct and this is very much the summary of GDPR.
if you have reason to hold it, you can providing it is done so responsibly and within reason. Asking for a medical declaration is justified
no i do not believe it is necessary to list everything. but in some cases it might be suitable.
my father had heart surgery 18 months ago, and so might be useful to know that even though he lives as normal life as could be expected, he could be considered “at risk” in some circumstances, situations and activities.
someone who has had an amputation for instance may be been living with a prosthetic for several years and thus lives a “normal” life might see a benefit in disclosing this for certain events.
Similarly, refusing participation for someone who refuses to declare their medical history, or who gives grounds to suspect that they haven’t been honest about their medical history, is also perfectly justified.
By not having the relevant medical history, any risk assessment and the effectiveness of the relevant mitigation methods are put in doubt. The safety of the event therefore cannot be guaranteed by with the cadet’s participation continuing.
1 Like
There needs to be a whole discussion around TG Forms in general because (very broad brush stroke here!) they aren’t kept within need to know, it discourages discussion between the OC and Activity Lead because it’s assumed it’ll be on the TG Form, and I made the decision a good few years ago to get cadets to but them in a sealed envelop with OSP on. Many a time had something been on there that people didn’t know what it was (whether medication or a condition) that they then googled and treated the cadet as the internet said or even stopped them going on activities because of it and actually they don’t have A Typical views of it.
We aren’t there yet but to be fully inclusive there needs to be more transparency, and open conversations by Sqb staff to activity staff. And realistic conversations with cadets and their parents about adaptions or limitations because of medication or conditions.
For me in an ideal world we wouldn’t have physical forms, the parent would sign something online (maybe Cdt registers email sent to parent who can electronically sign), then when you hover over the red icon next to a person on sms it gives a over laying title (Allergy, physical, neurodiverse etc),
And we won’t even mention staff TG Forms of they are even filled out, they very rarely are filled out with proper info because they don’t want their peers to know all the in-depth bits
2 Likes
My Adj has a better handle on local conditions than myself - why does everyone assume the OC is best placed to advise?
4 Likes
If someone fails to declare medical history, how are you going to know…?
Suspecting they haven’t (“I’ve got nothing against your left leg - unfortunately neither have you…”), is again a bit of a leap - unless you have strong reasons to suspect.
My first question would be “are you a doctor, Sir?”
Trying to put an end to the back and forth:
There is already an overwhelming admin burden on volunteers;
Individuals do have a right to privacy - RAFAC does not have the right to demand a full medical history for ALL activities (despite this being insinuated) - after all being treated for worms is not going to impact a cadet’s ability to participate in bag packing or even participating at Nijmegen…,
The onus is on encouraging the individual to share their info, when requested - so that support and assistance can be provided.
As it stands - an employer can request an employer visit the company doctor to be examined and confirm that they are indeed fit for duty; in the same way the RAF can send staff to the Med Section - but no such provision exists within RAFAC.
RAFAC should be accurately informing participants and their guardians IN ADVANCE of their participation, training and selection for physically demanding activities - the potential injuries and after effects of participation.
RAFAC should also be clearer about what level of pain management / treatment can be offered / condoned.
Personal medical data in the 21st century, should not be being recorded manually still. Access to sensitive personal data like this, should be controlled on a need-to-know basis.
By storing it electronically, alongside Cadet Portal, access could be controlled and monitored, with access limited to the activity commander or their immediate superior.
(Let’s be honest - the chances of needing access to the med forms is virtually nil)
I am aware that there are plenty of scenarios where a mobile data connection is not available - but in such an event one should be able to contact either the NOK or the superior officer by telephone.
(If you are training in an area where there is neither a data or phone signal - I would question the safety of the location - in the event of an emergency!)
A concisely worded disclaimer (certainly more concise than mine) along the lines of “any medical condition that could reasonably affect the individual’s Health, Safety or Wellbeing - as well as that of others, should be disclosed, with information relating to therapeutic treatments including medications, their dosage & means of administration.
Where health is dependent on specific medications (such as Asthma, Diabetes, serious allergies - we would recommend spare devices / medication be held by an appointed member of staff.
Please sign to say if you are happy for RAFAC staff to provide, on request simple household medications - such as ibuprofen, paracetamol, aspirin, antihistamines (with tick or cross by each).
In the event of prolonged injury or illness, parents / guardians will be contacted to discuss.
Anything beyond this list will require confirmation by a parent / guardian or medical professional.
Please list any and all medications that have had an adverse reaction, or you wish NOT be provided.
Access to medical information is strictly controlled; all data must be updated every six months.
(Separate medical info recordable by the cadet, so that private information is not shared with parents, if that’s the cadet’s wish.)
If a member of RAFAC staff has concerns for the health / wellbeing of an individual, that person MAY be removed from the activity - and prevented from rejoining until they have sought clearance by an appropriate medical professional.
Like I’ve said previously - I’m not good on “concise sentences!” But this sort of approach is inline with most schools and other institutions - to help simplify and maintain a sense of reasonable balance.
As we have discussed at length, the likelihood is the management of routine / minor injuries and malaise - anything more significant is almost certainly going to provoke a trip to local hospital / GP, or the very least - a phone call home to discuss.
Let’s stop making life so difficult!
1 Like
Err, road marching?
2 Likes
Fair, and a lot of training officers may also be better places!
1 Like
Actually it isn’t insinuated at all.
ACTO 010 dictates when TG21s forms are required. I suggest you check it out…it saves a lot of effort and admin
1 Like
Okay, there’s a lot of to and froing here on who’s right.
So cadet attends an activity, any activity, doesn’t declare a medical issue, something happens and the individual is seriously hurt.
Who’s responsible? Bet HQAC will throw the IC Activity under the bus for not knowing an undeclared issue!!
1 Like
Never done road marching on Sqn, but because of this post…was wondering what the quals are, if any of delivering blue badge marching on sqn or is it only a wing run activity.
This happened to a friend recently.he was eventually cleared of wrongdoing, but the process was awful.
Training activity to be delivered by qualified Road Marching Team Leaders.
PTS:
Blue - theory / classroom package, including heat related injuries; practical info about appropriate clothing, hydration and nutrition; drill movements for on the go - moving from two ranks to one and back etc. Two qualifying walks: 12km and 15km.
Bronze: Blue badge, plus either 2x 20km on consecutive days; or 1x 40km (with appropriate training walks of progressively longer distances to build up)
Silver: Blue, plus Bronze; plus 2x40km on consecutive days (typically RAFWARMA Cosford for example)
Gold: completing 4x 40km (typically Nijmegen March)
1 Like
If given the opportunity to declare a medical issue, but the individual fails to declare one - then it’s a simple defence of “we had no idea”, therefore activity staff not held responsible.
In this instance, ignorance IS a reasonable defence.
1 Like
Getting back on topic:
Personally, I think the problem is multi-layered.
By slashing the number of cadets and staff able to participate at Nijmegen - by link ting participation to Military Team only, has had the effect of greatly dis-incentivising a disproportionate on large amount of cadets - which means participation in Silver events such as Cosford has also shrunk considerably - as well as the number of staff supporting the activity.
(More than happy for anyone to jump in and correct me).
Cosford, LaSER March, Waendel, Gaerloch, BDWF Lyneham Weekend were all considered qualifying events for Nijmegen; and all were considered a “means to an end”.
Every year, you’d expect to get dozens and dozens of eager cadets at the start of the season - many of whom would drift away through attrition - but my local Wing would be able to field both a Military Team and a Civvie team.
Other Wings (notably Kent and Middlesex immediately spring to mind), would field a Military team and up to 6 or even 7 civvy teams!
It’s widely accepted that TK was anti Road Marching - he didn’t see the benefit; didn’t see the positive effects on the individuals; didn’t understand the camaraderie; didn’t appreciate the legacy of RAFAC’s involvement at Nijmegen - @Mr_OZ if I’m not mistaken, adding together the military and civvvy teams, RAFAC were THE largest collective group each year.
Significant incidents occurred around 2019, which when added to the fallout of the cancellation of Day 2 in 2022, brought about the immediate cessation of Civilian teams; and the limitation to 100 personnel (staff and cadets) to go Military with the BMC.
If you talk to enough CFAVs with lengthy experience, you’re bound to hear stories aplenty of “inappropriate” behaviour that wouldn’t be tolerated etc - I am resolutely NOT defending every story I’ve heard - frankly there are some shockers…
BUT, they were all isolated. As in any organisation / company there are incidents of bad behaviour that needs to be dealt with, prevented, managed, educated etc…
I think it’s fair to say that TK refused to engage with that concept.
There have been reports about excessive amounts of VA that has been claimed by CFAVs - despite it being limited to xx days (can’t remember the number, but it was to offset the “cost” of four days at Nijmegen, travel out & back plus two day qualifier - unless I’ve missed anything.
As an activity; RM is one of the most underrated public exposure activities for the Blue Footprint; local communities get to see groups of young people doing something positive, challenging and rewarding.
Often the teams will be “heard” vociferously enjoying themselves to the tune of Captain Jack - if not in-tune.
Having met and chatted to teams from all over the country, whether at Cosford, Waendel or Nijmegen - I’ve yet to encounter anyone not enjoying themselves.
The bigger issue is that many Sqn staff assume that their cadets won’t enjoy it - and don’t take time to promote the activity.
Don’t get me wrong, I appreciate it isn’t for everyone - but by preventing cadets from experimenting for themselves is wrong.
(Yeah - pretty sure I’m one of those “cultists” @AlexCorbin was describing!)
1 Like
My only exposure to RM as a cadet was a ‘sponsored walk’ (32 miles over two days, with a stopover at our local — now closed — RAF station) and a day of ACLC when it was at Halton. Years later I was on the Waendel Walk Steering Group and saw groups of uniformed ATC cadets participating (I always assumed they were local, not realising its national significance as a Nijmegen qualifier).
So, coming at it with minimal former knowledge, I can’t for the life of me work out why an MOD sponsored, unformed cadet force would field both military and civilian teams. Wouldn’t this have constituted two-tier participation? I’m happy to be mentored by those in the know, but it sounds like only having military teams is better and we should try to grow that rather than go back to how it was.
I remember leading an RAFC Cranwell team back in 2009 and I had a guy who hadn’t done the hard practice. He was in clip and I wanted to can him so it didn’t impact the rest of his commissioning course.
I had senior officers offering me serious counsel and encouragement about not canning him.
With hindsight I realised it was because we were likely going to win best team (we’d been getting some serious praise for our rest stop drills) and we didn’t have the numbers to lose one team member and still qualify. And we were really close to the end…
…but it spoke pretty strongly to the fact that people would risk a bloke’s time on the commissioning course in pursuit of a win.
There’s enough pressure on cadets and staff as it is, so I get where @pEp is coming from here.
1 Like
Did you win? I’ve never had a clue how you win that prize.
Yes, they definitely can. However, in my experience, it’s been the cadets with this attitude and it’s necessary to have a good quality RMTL to withdraw cadets when they’re clearly in pain (again, there is a distinction between being sore, which most people are at the end of a long walk, and being in pain). Admittedly, my experience as an athletics coach does help me to spot when cadets are at risk of injury if they continue.
I’ve had to withdraw cadets against their wishes, despite them arguing strongly that they wish to continue, because they were clearly in pain. Many RMTLs here will have had to have done the same before too.
But knowing how to keep that balance of endurance versus when to quit is a key skill in life in general. Road Marching helps cadets to work towards that understanding in a safe & supportive environment. It certainly isn’t an activity that’s for everyone, but I’ve seen it first-hand build impressive resilience in cadets who had been shy, nervous and would fall apart at the first hurdle. I don’t believe there’s any other activity that RAFAC offers that has the same impact.
3 Likes
In about 2018, pulled a cadet from walking on day 2 at Nijmegen due to clear pain when at the rest point I was staffing. Pulled a cadet from Blue RM event for the same reason today. I have certainly not seen the press-on-itis that is regularly spouted as being a thing by people outside of RM.
3 Likes