You are again missing the context. You are arguing against statements you are mis-interpreting. I’m not sure how else to help you. Let’s break this down for you. No one, at any point, said police shouldn’t or wouldn’t respond. No one said EMS shouldn’t or wouldn’t be sent on an unconscious/unresponsive person call. The initial comment was in response to commenters theorizing about an unvisualized person and a dispatcher labeling it as an unconscious person. There is certainty involved in the dispatcher’s labeling of unconscious (meaning person is visualized during the call) because it’s the determinant of which resources get utilized (ie who goes— do they send a squad car? Do they send the fire dept to break down a door? Do they send an ambulance for immediate medical intervention? They don’t send all 2 or all 3 for a simple ‘I think they’re in there sleeping because their alarm is going off and they aren’t answering’, you have to save available resources for appropriate situations. So, if at the time of the call the dispatcher reports it as an unconscious person, it implies there is a visual on the person at that time. At which point the dispatcher is trained to advise a pulse/breathing check. The report of unconscious is what is key to my statements. It’s obvious from both your initial post and your follow-up comments that you put a lot of weight and emotion into “Lifetime” thinking and don’t have an understanding of how emergency resources work from point of dispatch to field to ER/trauma. In the US, there’s an accepted system, there are methods, there are certifications. It’s not a clusterfk free for all based on assumptions and it’s uniform among US cities. It prevents communication breakdown and prevents delays in care.