Why experienced Tasmanian paramedic Bryce Duggan was fired after attempting to remove a ping pong ball from a woman’s body

Why experienced Tasmanian paramedic Bryce Duggan was fired after attempting to remove a ping pong ball from a woman’s body

An experienced paramedic was fired after attempting to remove a ping pong ball from a woman’s body, with his employer criticising the action as “inappropriate”.

Bryce Duggan started working at Ambulance Tasmania in 1977 but was dismissed after conducting an “improper” examination at the woman’s home in December 2020.

According to a decision by the Tasmanian Industrial Commission (TIC), Mr Duggan lost his job as a result of the incident in June 2022 and later filed a claim for unfair dismissal.

He claims he never tried to remove the ball and that it was “quite common” for paramedics to help remove objects such as Lego, insects or sex toys.

After arriving at the woman’s home at 4:40 a.m., Mr. Duggan examined her with a flashlight and Magill forceps to see if he could remove the object.

In his statement to investigators, he said a volunteer paramedic assisted and was present throughout the test.

He said the patient was adamant about not going to hospital and she wanted Mr Duggan to try to remove the ball before she would consider going.

“The patient told me she wanted me to look at the location of the object to see if I could remove it,” Mr Duggan said in his statement.

Why experienced Tasmanian paramedic Bryce Duggan was fired after attempting to remove a ping pong ball from a woman’s body

An experienced paramedic was fired after attempting to remove a table tennis ball from a woman’s body. His employer criticized this as “inappropriate” (symbolic image).

Mr Duggan said he told the woman there was more suitable equipment at the hospital to treat the problem and took her to the Royal Hobart Hospital (pictured).

Mr Duggan said he told the woman there was more suitable equipment at the hospital to treat the problem and took her to the Royal Hobart Hospital (pictured).

“I told her I would look into it, but if I concluded that I could not visualize the object, she would have to come to the hospital.”

Mr Duggan said the McGill forceps, which he had warmed up underwater, were the only equipment he had available during the operation.

The former paramedic said he tapped the ping pong ball with the pliers and quickly realized that it was not easy to remove.

“I quickly removed the forceps and informed the patient that it was not possible to remove the foreign body. Such an attempt was beyond my authority and would risk causing further harm to the patient,” he said in his statement.

Mr Duggan said he told the woman there was more suitable equipment at the hospital to treat the problem and took her to the Royal Hobart Hospital.

Ambulance Tasmania said the examination carried out was “improper” and should not have been carried out by a paramedic.

It also found that Mr Duggan’s attempts to remove the ball – which the former paramedic denies – were outside his professional authority.

“The defendant alleges that this is a material breach and a valid reason for termination,” noted TIC President David Barclay.

Ambulance Tasmania said the examination carried out was “improper” and not what a paramedic should have done (symbol image)

Ambulance Tasmania said the examination carried out was “improper” and not what a paramedic should have done (symbol image)

Mr Barclay said Mr Duggan had sought to downplay unfavourable evidence and was “prone to exaggeration” when it came to issues in his favour.

He concluded that the paramedic’s visit to the home had not been necessary at all and that the severity of the patient’s illness had been classified in the lowest category.

Mr Barclay agreed with Ambulance Tasmania that Mr Duggan had attempted to remove the table tennis ball during the examination.

“Overall, I accept that he does not believe he did anything wrong, even though he was not trained to remove the item, he did not have the appropriate tools and there was no urgency and therefore he did not need to attempt removal,” concluded Mr Barclay.

“What is particularly worrying is that he does not acknowledge that he has done something wrong.”

Mr Barclay noted that the attempts to remove the ball were made without appropriate training or tools and were outside his scope of practice.

Mr Barclay confirmed the decision to terminate his employment, noting that Mr Duggan had a history of “inappropriate or questionable conduct” at work.

This finding follows a number of incidents, including Mr Duggan’s unauthorised use of capsicum spray in the workplace, the use of ambulances to spread slurry on his property on two occasions and allegations of sexual harassment.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *