1141

[Guest guest]

Thank you Gene. As the Director of a small rural service, this is our

concern as well.

, Director

Seminole EMS

Mike, Mike, Mike!!

Read the statute. It plainly says they may " request or ORDER " the blood

draw. Now, I would argue that it's still permissive, but as says,

young troopers with too much testosterone will make a scene about it and

some

might go so far as to threaten us with arrest for some sort of theory of

interfering with a police officer. Believe me I have had it out with

troopers many times over who's in control of patients at the scene of

MVIs

and I don't want to see this happening. They've got the gun and I don't

and

arguing with a stubborn cop is not something I relish when I'm on their

turf.

When we're in the courtroom and on MY turf, it's a different thing.

People

get real emotional about the DWI thing, as we all know.

Also, for us in the country where we barely have enough people as it is

and

staffing can be nip and tuck, having somebody tied up in court is NOT

something we want to see.

And on the liability question, what if the subject jerks away while

you're

trying to do the blood draw and you stick yourself or somebody else?

What if

you break a needle? This is NOT something that most of us want to do.

When

people can sue Mcs because they spilled their coffee and obtain

millions, people can be sued by burglars who were shot while trying to

rob

them and win, it's not so much of a stretch for a DWI defendant to sue

us for

any number of phony theories. Anybody can sue you on any day for any

reason

and you have to either defend it or have a default judgment taken

against

you. My point was that insurance won't pay for your defense, so the

service

ends up paying for it or you do yourself.

I would have no objection whatsoever if the amendment were changed to

make it

up to the EMT or Paramedic whether or not to do the blood draw and make

it

clear that they cannot be ORDERED to do so, but the way it's written now

there's room for that interpretation and it will inevitably be

interpreted by

some as requiring us to do it.

With a change to make it clear that drawing the blood is up to the EMT

or

Paramedic and a service can refuse to respond, the problem would be

solved.

That way if you want to make yourself available to DPS and police to do

it,

more power to you. But I don't want to do it and don't want to be

ORDERED to

do it, and my service doesn't want us to be called to do it.

You mention billing those who call you out and making them pay. RIGHT!

Do

you really think DPS will pay for this? No way .

Either change the bill to make it clearly optional for us to do it or

don't

pass the bill. I can't imagine that any medical director in his or her

right

mind will allow us to do it under any circumstances anyway. And

unless the

legislature wants to legislate the authority for us to do it, I can't

see us

being allowed to. So what's the good of amending the law anyway? It's

just

going to cause conflicts that we don't need to have to go through.

Gene

---

Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.

Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).

Version: 6.0.471 / Virus Database: 269 - Release Date: 4/10/2003

[Guest guest]

I see a lot of potential here for LE officers to take advantage of EMS

personnel. There is nothing in this section of the Transportation Code that

says that the blood would be drawn at the scene of an accident or on someone

that EMS was checking out as a patient anyway. It says (among other things)

that under certain circumstances LE can order a blood draw on a person who

is under arrest. I can see us being called to scenes where EMS might not

otherwise have been needed. I can also see us being called to the jail in

the middle of the night (or any other time) because it is more convenient

for the LE officer to call us--that way he/she doesn't have to take the

offender to the ER.

We can't even be sure that they would call for the on-duty crew. I have

actually been called at home and asked if I could come down to the jail and

draw blood on a prisoner. I refused (not a patient, no authority to do it

without my Medical Director's authorization, etc), but I can see where the

right to order EMS to draw the blood could cause some serious conflicts

between EMS and LE.

I have known of times when ER personnel (RNs) have had to refuse to draw

blood because the LE officer didn't follow proper procedure, the subject

wasn't under arrest and hadn't consented to the draw, etc. As far as

phlebotomists are concerned, isn't this what they routinely do, anyway--take

samples that will give information to be used by someone else. Direct

patient care is not one of their responsibilities, is it?

Expecting cops to draw blood makes more sense than asking EMS to do it under

these circumstances. They would be gathering evidence as part of a LE

investigation. That is one of their primary responsibilities, isn't it?

Gathering evidence for LE is not one of our primary

responsibilities--patient care is. The proposed changes in this law could

put us in the position of being expected to gather evidence for LE, even in

cases where no patient care was being done, or was not even needed.

Maxine Pate

hire-Pattison EMS

----- Original Message -----

>

> My question is...have nurses had these problems that

> are of concern here? Does LE go in and order an ER RN

> to draw blood, even without the physician giving the

> order? Are there any cases of LE bringing in a DWI

> suspect to the ER, and demanding that a nurse stop

> patient care to draw blood? (Obviously not as big a

> strain at a large ER...but what about the small rural

> hospitals with 3 nurses and a physician working on a

> critical patient...) Do nurses routinely have to go

> to court to defend their draws against negligence

> charges? What about phlebotomists? They are crossing

> over from medical to LE whenever they draw..but

> someone has to do it. (I REALLY don't like the idea

> of cops phlebing!)

>

> Connie

>