the inquest has heard the call-taker suspected the students could have overdosed, but was prohibited by the priority dispatch system from asking that specific question.
instead, clawson testified, the call-taker asked several clarifying questions to try to get to the root of what happened.
but the juror noted they all sounded the same — what happened before this? was anyone else with them? what’s going on now? — and didn’t result in new information being provided in an urgent way.
“instead of asking all of those multiple times, one of those (questions) could have been: ‘were there drugs involved?'” the juror put to clawson.
when the seizure protocol was chosen for this case, a box popped up warning the call-taker it was an unusual medical complaint for two patients. that required her to confirm she wasn’t mistaken about this choice.
wouldn’t that be a good place to ask the call-taker to make more follow-up questions, a juror asked.
clawson said that change is under discussion, but said none of the 3,000 centres worldwide that pay to use his software has submitted this exact proposal for change.
“maybe you can be the one that does,” clawson told the juror. “that (proposal) does make some sense, and that’s actually on my list of things here that we want to look at based on learning from every event as much as possible.”