Fired EMT claims police impeded care

[ffemt8978]

Fired Memphis EMT says police impeded Tyre Nichols' care

MEMPHIS, Tenn. (AP) — A former Memphis Fire Department emergency medical technician told a Tennessee board Friday that officers “impeded patient care” by refusing to remove Tyre Nichols ' handcuffs, which would have allowed EMTs to check his vital signs after he was brutally beaten by police.

apnews.com

One of the fired EMTs in the Tyre Nichols case claims that police impeded care by not removing the handcuffs, preventing them from being able to take vital signs. He then goes on to claim

Long said he repeatedly tried to place a monitor on Nichols to check his vital signs, including blood pressure, but Nichols would roll away. Long said he interpreted this movement as Nichols rejecting care and refusing cooperation.

Thoughts on this?

 

[CCCSD]

Bwahahahaha. That’s it.

 

[cruiseforever]

Would be interesting to see the PCR .

 

[akflightmedic]

Definitely would love to see the PCR and false documentation if this is true. Regardless, rolling away does not imply refusal, words establishing competence and then verbally refusing is what I would need. And when have handcuffs ever prevented a blood pressure from being taken? This dude is grasping straws here....I have assessed plenty of handcuffed patients. This dude screwed up, time to own the mistake.

I wonder who wrote the report, the AEMT or the EMT.

 

[ffemt8978]

Definitely would love to see the PCR and false documentation if this is true. Regardless, rolling away does not imply refusal, words establishing competence and then verbally refusing is what I would need. And when have handcuffs ever prevented a blood pressure from being taken? This dude is grasping straws here....I have assessed plenty of handcuffed patients. This dude screwed up, time to own the mistake.

I wonder who wrote the report, the AEMT or the EMT.

Agreed. I also have a question about someone who is injured and in custody being able to refuse medical care without the officer agreeing to it. He was going to need to be medically cleared before being accepted into the jail, and simply rolling away from EMS does not rise to that criteria.

 

[DrParasite]

Agreed. I also have a question about someone who is injured and in custody being able to refuse medical care without the officer agreeing to it.

A person is custody cannot refuse or consent to treatment; that decision is made by the officer. So, in theory, a person can request to be treated and transported to the hospital, however the officer can refuse on the person's behalf. Yes, I've had this happen, yes, it gets sticky, this is when supervisors get involved, because no one wants to be holding the bag. It's also why if a person in custody is seeing in the ER, the PD is responsible for the bill, not the person's insurance.

He was going to need to be medically cleared before being accepted into the jail, and simply rolling away from EMS does not rise to that criteria.

I've heard of cops requesting EMS to provide the medical clearance before being accepted into jail. Last I checked, we don't do this, but it hasn't stopped the cops from calling us.

I have had cops refuse to remove handcuffs. I once had a cardiac arrest at the local prison, where we were transporting with CPR in progress, where the CO wouldn't allow us to leave unless the person was in leg irons. I told him "this guy is clinically dead... if he can wake up, get his heart beating, and have enough energy to escape, I think he's earned that freedom."

here is the EMT's defense for refusing to do his job:

Long said he did not force the blood pressure cuff onto Nichols or hold him down in fear of being accused of assault.

At one point, officers leaned over Nichols and were “in his face, saying loudly that the patient is not going anywhere and that they are not going to uncuff him, impeding patient care,” according to Long.

rolling away from EMS doesn't mean you are refusing care... this EMT is doing whatever he can to save his career (he has already lost his job). I don't see that happening, and he is being scapegoated because of the horrible actions by the MPD officers, as well as systemic issues within the Memphis FD.

 

[johnrsemt]

Huh;
Where I work a person in custody or under arrest can refuse treatment and care. Until they go before the judge and are found guilty of something they are NOT in State or County care, and any medical care is still paid for by the person.
We have officers try a lot to get us to transport prisoners, because then they are closer to the jail, and a deputy from town can get them from the hospital: and the local officer doesn't have to drive them 120 miles 1 way to take them to jail. Problem goes back to the prisoner gets a bill from EMS and the hospital.

PT job we don't do medical clearances on prisoners: FT job we do, but it is an Army thing

 

[MEDicJohn]

I told him "this guy is clinically dead... if he can wake up, get his heart beating, and have enough energy to escape, I think he's earned that freedom."

I love this

 

[Bullets]

A person is custody cannot refuse or consent to treatment; that decision is made by the officer.

FWIW, our legal department disagrees with this. It came up about 2 years ago and went through a long review process. We had a whole policy revision and training on it. The army of attorneys are of the opinion that patients in custody are still allowed to refuse or request treatment. We basically throw it back on the cops if they try and push back on the patients decisions. If they want to refuse, we take the refusal and its up to Officer Flatfoot to drag them against their will to the ER. If they want to be transported, we advocate for it and its up to that same Officer to deny medical care for the patient.

 

[DrParasite]

FWIW, our legal department disagrees with this. It came up about 2 years ago and went through a long review process.

We had a whole policy revision and training on it. The army of attorneys are of the opinion that patients in custody are still allowed to refuse or request treatment. We basically throw it back on the cops if they try and push back on the patients decisions.

Interesting... IIRC, you work for my old full time agency, so that's a very interesting change.

If they want to refuse, we take the refusal and its up to Officer Flatfoot to drag them against their will to the ER. If they want to be transported, we advocate for it and its up to that same Officer to deny medical care for the patient.

That's interesting... I have had officers deny medical care for patient's in custody. As you said, we did advocate that the patient should be transported, and escalated the situation up several levels on the PD side, and came to an acceptable resolution. But since the officer may deny medical care for a patient (and transport can be a medical intervention), they can refuse on behalf of the patient. Still an interesting legal situation, one I wouldn't want to get involved in.

 

[CCCSD]

FWIW, our legal department disagrees with this. It came up about 2 years ago and went through a long review process. We had a whole policy revision and training on it. The army of attorneys are of the opinion that patients in custody are still allowed to refuse or request treatment. We basically throw it back on the cops if they try and push back on the patients decisions. If they want to refuse, we take the refusal and its up to Officer Flatfoot to drag them against their will to the ER. If they want to be transported, we advocate for it and its up to that same Officer to deny medical care for the patient.

No bias there, right?