What do you think if you were in a situation and you didn't want to be lifeflighted because of Saddle Embolism?

Kittens, is this family member a medical professional?  Who specifically diagnosed the saddle embolism?  The family member?   If it was a med pro, I am quite sure that individual would access his/her office, ER's or hospital's resources to order a lifeflight. 

I don't understand why a family member is giving this kind of medical advice (unless he/she is a med pro).  How did you learn, and/or who told you that you have a saddle embolism?  Or was it diagnosed, you're reluctant to take the flight, and a family member is encouraging you?   If this is the case and you've been advised by a  med pro, listen to that person, and take the flight if you're advised by a medical person.

From the OP's profile:

"If a person has saddle pulmonary embolism and is a life and death situation what would you do? Would take lifeflight when your scared and afraid to die? Or would you be taken by ambulance to where you didn't have time and wouldn't make it to the place? What would be your decision. My deal was I had no choice because my family made me when I didn't want to go on lifeflight to a different hospital. Whose decision would that be if your married and other family members made you ride the helicopter to be transferred from hospital to icu. Could you refuse if your in a life and death situation?"

It sounds like this was already done and the OP's life saved. Not sure why s/he is asking if there is no longer any opportunity to change things.

Well, this post is 3 hours old so I hope OP has made her decision.

Not that cost should be the determining factor, but here is what I was PM'ed by another on this forum regarding a discussion about bankruptcy,

"...my friend...has a six figure Life Flight bill, 2 different carriers. Insurance has balked at paying beyond 1 'speciality care transportation' fee of $10k."

Just something real to ponder in this hypothetical scenario.

It's a patient's right to refuse recommended care.
But a patient with a saddle embolism could be at high risk of deterioration. It's important to get the patient to a facility that can provide the highest level of care, quickly. If it were me, I'd fly--if I became acutely ill during the transport the flight will still get you to the next facility faster.

I have horrific fear of flying, and have never EVER FLOWN.

In the “hypothetical” situation you’ve described, I would have shoved my caregivers out of the way and RACED to the helicopter.

More seriously, I live near a very active suburban airport within access to at least two medical centers and several specialized medical facilities, and I have literally NEVER heard of any sort of emergency INVOLVING ANY medical transport vehicle coming in or going out.

So in the situation you described Kittens1976, I would UNQUESTIONABLY follow my medical supervisor’s recommendation, and if that were the “life flight” and I wanted the best possible medical outcome, I’d be on it.

I guess you can choose to be a statistic by delaying treatment or you can suck it up and take the flight.

I can't wrap my head around unrational fears. People die daily in automobile accidents, so there is a greater risk in the ambulance.

I would not allow one freak incident (out of however many of these emergency flights take place every year) to prevent me from reaching the treatment I needed by the fastest possible route. So I would, so to speak, "feel the fear and do it anyway" - and take the flight.

But it's your body and your decision.

PS I don't know what a saddle embolism is without looking it up so I don't know if that makes a difference. Only it does sound like something you wouldn't want to shilly-shally around with.