http://www.thebostonchannel.com/news/9637779/detail.html
Could this be the story you are refering to? A little more detail here if it is.
According to the link you posted, it appears several lifeguards refused to perform CPR, citing lack of mouthpieces.
Unreal.
More than one lifeguard refused....? Whoa, that's pretty stinking bad if being reported correctly.
Of course, this is Boston, where the tradition of watching people drown appears to be strong.
When I hear someone yell fire, I've got this little habit of running toward the fire. It sounds like the "lifeguards" were just there to work on their tan. A hearty Huzzah for the "untrained" bystanders who jumped in and saved the kid.
That's the story. It says "lifeguards." Man, that's pathetic. How on earth could anyone not perform CPR on a 3-year-old?
On top of that, the child was floating, face down, for a long time without any of these lifeguards noticing.
READ THE PIECE, AND YEP! A LAWSUIT LOOMS. SAYS THE LIFEGUARDS (PLURAL) REFUSED BECAUSE NO MOUTHPIECE. THEY DIDN'T COME ON DUTY WITHOUT THEIR BATHING SUIT; WHY THE H#LL WOULD THEY NOT HAVE A MOUTHPIECE--LIFEGUARDS ARE HIRED TO PULL PEOPLE OUT AND GIVE CPR.
VAUDINE