BAC Testing on Patients

[spike91]

I'm vollie EMS at a college campus in upstate New York and recently noticed that campus PD has begun running BACs on our patients when the tool is available to the responding PD unit.

On our campus, its SOP for a police unit to be dispatched to all intox calls dispatched to EMS, its a matter of the police being on scene to ensure that the EMS providers are safe in the event that the victim becomes agitated/refuses transport at which point if necessary they can enact a 2209, essentially forcing them to go get treatment at a hospital as they aren't mentally competent to make the decision when they're AMS.

Anyways, on multiple intoxs in the past few weeks the officers have begun doing BACs on the patients, none of whom were facing any charges. They were simply drunk and needed to sleep it off, the LEOs had no authority to press charges and did not do so, seeing as certain laws in our region prevent legal consequences for underage drinking when they call 911 for medical aid.

Anyone have any idea why they would be doing this? We don't request/need it for our assessments. Just curious as to the reasoning behind this practice.

 

[medic417]

Maybe for proof in case they use the "2209".

 

[spike91]

Good point. Never thought of it that way, thank you.

 

[fortsmithman]

We also have police accompany us on these type of calls. Except when the pt refuses treatment he or she is then given a choice. Either go along with us to the hospital or go with them to the be lodge in the drunk tank and charged with public intoxication. roughly 80 percent of the time they pick go with EMS.

 

[Veneficus]

We also have police accompany us on these type of calls. Except when the pt refuses treatment he or she is then given a choice. Either go along with us to the hospital or go with them to the be lodge in the drunk tank and charged with public intoxication. roughly 80 percent of the time they pick go with EMS.

This has been the case everywhere I have known for ages. But it brings up an interesting debate.

There is no quantitative accepted level of "clinically intoxicated."

Does a chronic alcoholic with a theraputic range above a legal limit automatically qualify as unable to make a decision based on the same measurement as operating a piece of machinery requiring psychomotor coordination?

Could you decide a known chronic alcoholic was AMS being beneath the average theraputic level.

Without doubt, alcoholism is a medical problem, and creates several. But it doesn't mean that an altered person is neccesarily off their baseline. What's more confounding, if somebody who is highly capable usually, but doesn't fall below the capabilities of an average or below average person, should they be considered too intoxicated to make a decision?

Now looking at the medical aspects, should a publically intoxicated person violating the law be given the choice of entering in to the emergency system in order to escape prosecution? Is it equal protection under the law if law enforcement offers it to some but not all? (like one being beligerent vs a happy drunk?)

With the exception of an acute medical episode from the event, like a traumatic injury, or inabillity to maintain an airway, is there really anything the ED does that warrents the screening costs?

How about a drunk tank where charges don't need to be filed? How about a system where nonacute medical aid is available?

Economically it is much cheaper to rehab an alcoholic than it is to constantly enter them into the emergency medical system.

Interesting conundrums.

 

[jjesusfreak01]

I am a very strong believer that calling 911 for a medical problem should protect you from any sort of criminal or civil action so long as you didn't hurt anyone else. Had a girl on my floor in my dormitory get completely wasted and fall out of her lofted bed. Huge goose egg on her forehead. We called 911, police, fire, and ems showed up. The police didn't file any charges, but she ended up getting in trouble with housing essentially for being drunk. I don't care what their sick reasoning is, you have to be a complete idiot to even consider taking action against someone here because it WILL reduce their likelihood of calling 911 the next time they are involved in an emergency.

I don't even want to consider the fallout for the school if a student died because their roommate didn't want them to get in trouble so they didn't call 911 in a real emergency. I would hope the school would get sued into oblivion.

 

[Aidey]

The problem is that university housing can be held liable for that stuff, even if they don't know about it. Where I went to school you had 3 strikes and you got kicked out. So if you were underage, or drinking in one of the "dry" dorms* you would get a strike against you. The "dry" dorms were dry by the nature of the dorm...the only people allowed to live there were under 21.

To the OP, could they been gathering info for a report? I could see a report titled "Campus PD contacted 348 people in the 10-11 school year for alcohol in toxication, and there was an average BAC of .12" or whatever. Or they could be training people in how to use the thing.

 

[spike91]

Zero disciplinary actions can be leveled if 911 is called for a medical emergency regarding intox or OD on our campus. The RAs can come gawk all they want, they don't get to know :censored::censored::censored::censored:.

 

[DrParasite]

I know this might shock you, but alcohol use and abuse is a big problem on most college campuses. shocker, I know.

More and more colleges are requiring anyone who is underage and has had alcohol needs to go to the hospital, regardless of if intoxicated or not. This has NOTHING to do with patient care, but rather to prevent the school from the liability because there have been successful lawsuits about college students dying form alcohol related incidents.

If your campus cops are checking everyone's BAC, they probably won't be filing legal charges; however they can file university charges, get you kicked out of housing, and possibly even thrown out of the school. It's another tool in the "do what I say or else" mentality that many people in authority, especially on college campuses have.

I hate cops who say "hospital or jail, your choice." more often than not, the patient will end up in my ambulance before I get there. and those who say jail, end up getting arrested, getting ticketed, and then we pick them up 30-60 minutes after they have been processed, because PD doesn't want to accept the liability for having a drunk person in their cell.

most PD's don't have drunk tanks anymore, for the whole liability reasons. Take them to the ER.

Side note: drive drunk, and pass out, and you are going to jail. walk drunk and pass out, and you are going to the ER. amazing.

 

[LonghornMedic]

I'm vollie EMS at a college campus in upstate New York and recently noticed that campus PD has begun running BACs on our patients when the tool is available to the responding PD unit.

On our campus, its SOP for a police unit to be dispatched to all intox calls dispatched to EMS, its a matter of the police being on scene to ensure that the EMS providers are safe in the event that the victim becomes agitated/refuses transport at which point if necessary they can enact a 2209, essentially forcing them to go get treatment at a hospital as they aren't mentally competent to make the decision when they're AMS.

Anyways, on multiple intoxs in the past few weeks the officers have begun doing BACs on the patients, none of whom were facing any charges. They were simply drunk and needed to sleep it off, the LEOs had no authority to press charges and did not do so, seeing as certain laws in our region prevent legal consequences for underage drinking when they call 911 for medical aid.

Anyone have any idea why they would be doing this? We don't request/need it for our assessments. Just curious as to the reasoning behind this practice.

I'm wondering from a legality standpoint, how they can do this. In some states, a warrant has to be issued by a judge to obtain blood, especially if the patient is not consenting. And where is their justification/probable cause to draw blood? Seems like some questionable police work. Nothing you can do about it, but always make sure to document everything they did prior to your arrival and in your presence.

 

[spike91]

I'm wondering from a legality standpoint, how they can do this. In some states, a warrant has to be issued by a judge to obtain blood, especially if the patient is not consenting. And where is their justification/probable cause to draw blood? Seems like some questionable police work. Nothing you can do about it, but always make sure to document everything they did prior to your arrival and in your presence.

Its a breathalyser, not blood test.

 

[Veneficus]

I'm wondering from a legality standpoint, how they can do this. In some states, a warrant has to be issued by a judge to obtain blood, especially if the patient is not consenting. And where is their justification/probable cause to draw blood? Seems like some questionable police work. Nothing you can do about it, but always make sure to document everything they did prior to your arrival and in your presence.

It could be in the terms and conditions you accept for going to that school. Education like driving is not a right, and you can have contractual obligations as part of being accepted or permitted to be a student.

 

[LonghornMedic]

Its a breathalyser, not blood test.

Even a Breathalyzer requires consent. Maybe most students just don't know any better.

 

[TransportJockey]

Even a Breathalyzer requires consent. Maybe most students just don't know any better.

A lot of places if you refuse the breathalyser then you automatically are taking a ride to the jail. That's why a lot of students here in NM just take the breathalyser in the field.

 

[jjesusfreak01]

I think usually submission to take a breathalyser is required only when you are driving or if you are otherwise contractually obligated to. Never required when you're just walking out on the street.

 

[Aidey]

I think usually submission to take a breathalyser is required only when you are driving or if you are otherwise contractually obligated to. Never required when you're just walking out on the street.

Not necessarily, if you are ordered to do something by a police officer it is generally not a good idea to refuse to do it.

College campus' are kind of their own special situations since, as Vene said, you often sign behavior agreements in order to live on campus or attend classes. They can hold you to totally different standards than whatever local, state or federal law is.

 

[spike91]

Let me be clear for this specific campus:
There are ZERO repercussions for calling for medical aid involving any type of drug/alcohol use. The RAs, should they show up while we're on scene, are kindly escorted away and told to mind their own damn business. The only manner in which someone can get in trouble is if they harm or attempt to harm one of the providers or officers in the process.

 

[ARS0111]

Bill 58

Just Ohio now but just be ready...

http://www.publicsafety.ohio.gov/links/MR2010/062410_Senate Bill 58.pdf

 

[jjesusfreak01]

Not necessarily, if you are ordered to do something by a police officer it is generally not a good idea to refuse to do it.

You respectfully ask the officer if you can decline the test, if he says no get it in writing, and then take the test. Anything after that gets thrown out in court, and doesn't cause additional problems at the scene.

 

[Shishkabob]

I am a very strong believer that calling 911 for a medical problem should protect you from any sort of criminal or civil action so long as you didn't hurt anyone else.

What about a burglary suspect who gets shot during the commission of the crime? Should they be exempt because they chose the wrong house with the armed owner?