Re: Re: HB 805 (and SB 14)

[Guest guest]

And just to throw my thoughts in.

I also see both sides of this and that it is in a gray area. But I, too,

have seen many lives ended by drunk drivers and seen even more drunk drivers

not getting the punishment that they deserve because of stupid legal

technicalities, etc. If the blood could be drawn on scene, prior to the

accused patient leaving for the ED, it would make the job of prosecuting

that much easier and very minimal extra time needed to do so on the scene.

Now I am a realist. I know that defense attorneys will try every way they

can to discount the blood draw, where it was done, how it was done, the

scene was dirty, blah blah blah, ad nauseum. But they pick apart every part

of the case anyway. We (the police) know it, the prosecuters know it, the

defense knows it. That is how the game is played. Just another day in the

criminal justice system. If it will help the prosecution to prove the case

in just a few cases, it will be worth it. If folks are scared to testify in

court and companies not willing to pay them overtime while they do so, well,

I don't know what to say about that. I have had to testify once in court as

a Paramedic, before being a cop. It was brutal, but I survived. And it is a

given that I have been to court a number of times now that I am a police

officer. But to tell you the truth, I have never been to court on a DWI

case. The system is so overburdened that there are usually handled in plea

agreements, right or wrong, good or bad. So the worry that a whole slew of

EMTs and Paramedics will be going trudging off to the courthouses in droves,

is not based in reality.

I think it could be a good thing, not without it's own set of problems, but

a good thing as the bill has been narrowed down and amended.

Now all that aside. I am still here in the lovely deserts of Kuwait where

the temperatures are ever rising, up to 109 yesterday with 12% humidity. No

lack of patients to be taken care of here, good job security. I am looking

forward to some leave in 5 weeks when I will be heading back to Texas to

grab the wife and kids and us all head to Hawaii for two weeks of R & R. Then

it is back over here for who knows how long.

Y'all take care and stay safe back at home.

Moseley, LP

HM2, USNR

Camp Patriot, Kuwait

>

> Gene,

>

> I would ask that you read the ammended language of this law. It

> specifically points out that the blood draw request has to be the result of

> an accident where EMS is already on scene, it is up to the paramedic to

> specify if it is possible to do and will not interfer with patient care, and

> all agencies and personnel are protected from any and all liability as a

> result of the needle stick.

>

> The point of the legislation, from the guy who wrote it, is that on the

> most important cases (those involving death and life threatening injuries)

> it would be possible, if the medics are standing around watching the

> helicopter fly the critical trauma patient away, to possibly get blood drawn

> quickly instead of waiting 1 to 2 hours to get the scene cleaned up, the

> patient to the ED, and the procedure done there. That is why this law would

> be in the section of the traffic code that deals with DUI's resulting in

> serious injury or death resulting in a mandatory blood draw...not the

> section where the breath test is waived or the suspect requests a blood

> draw...it doesn't apply there.

>

> Dudley

>

> PS: I have no personal experience with DUI as I have been fortunate enough

> to not have that happen...although I have seen many many many lives ended by

> such needless stupidity and I, for one, would like to do what I can to stop

> this needless death.

>

>

[Guest guest]

Yes, doing blood draw is a very simple skill. But why the fervent stand to

be kept out of the loop?

Not trying to stir things up, I am far too busy here to need more stuff

stirred up. But trying to understand what the big fear is. If it can help

get one more drunk driver that takes out some innocent folks convicted, I

and all for it. And no, not just because I am a police officer as well as a

paramedic. Had this come around 8 years ago, I would have been for it then,

too.

Moseley, LP

HM2, USNR

Camp Patriot, Kuwait

>

> NM state troopers r carrying narcan auto-injectors.

> Blood draw is a VERY simple skill. Teach LE 2 do it

> and keep us out of the loop. Jim davis

>

[Guest guest]

Yes, doing blood draw is a very simple skill. But why the fervent stand to

be kept out of the loop?

Not trying to stir things up, I am far too busy here to need more stuff

stirred up. But trying to understand what the big fear is. If it can help

get one more drunk driver that takes out some innocent folks convicted, I

and all for it. And no, not just because I am a police officer as well as a

paramedic. Had this come around 8 years ago, I would have been for it then,

too.

Moseley, LP

HM2, USNR

Camp Patriot, Kuwait

>

> NM state troopers r carrying narcan auto-injectors.

> Blood draw is a VERY simple skill. Teach LE 2 do it

> and keep us out of the loop. Jim davis

>

[Guest guest]

Yes, doing blood draw is a very simple skill. But why the fervent stand to

be kept out of the loop?

Not trying to stir things up, I am far too busy here to need more stuff

stirred up. But trying to understand what the big fear is. If it can help

get one more drunk driver that takes out some innocent folks convicted, I

and all for it. And no, not just because I am a police officer as well as a

paramedic. Had this come around 8 years ago, I would have been for it then,

too.

Moseley, LP

HM2, USNR

Camp Patriot, Kuwait

>

> NM state troopers r carrying narcan auto-injectors.

> Blood draw is a VERY simple skill. Teach LE 2 do it

> and keep us out of the loop. Jim davis

>

[Guest guest]

Have you ever had to testify in court in a insurance law suit either for or

against you patient?

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Re: Re: HB 805 (and SB 14)

Dear Mike,

I am not saying that medics are any different from nurses. I simply stated

that EMS currently maintains an unbiased stance in the community and does not

need more strain of going to court having their personal backgrounds ran through

the ringer.

As you know DWI trials can go several different ways, the ones you think

will get convicted, usually dont and the ones you dont think will even go to

trial get convicted. As a paramedic I have had to testify in several cases

questioning my opinion of the patient/violater and you know as well as I do its

all about the money and the attorney you can hire. snip I just think medics

have a bigger role to fufill then being dragged into court badgered by a defense

attorney, name placed on public record and made to testify against a patient.

snip below

----------

No virus found in this outgoing message.

Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.

Version: 7.0.308 / Virus Database: 266.11.10 - Release Date: 5/13/2005

[Guest guest]

Have you ever had to testify in court in a insurance law suit either for or

against you patient?

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Re: Re: HB 805 (and SB 14)

Dear Mike,

I am not saying that medics are any different from nurses. I simply stated

that EMS currently maintains an unbiased stance in the community and does not

need more strain of going to court having their personal backgrounds ran through

the ringer.

As you know DWI trials can go several different ways, the ones you think

will get convicted, usually dont and the ones you dont think will even go to

trial get convicted. As a paramedic I have had to testify in several cases

questioning my opinion of the patient/violater and you know as well as I do its

all about the money and the attorney you can hire. snip I just think medics

have a bigger role to fufill then being dragged into court badgered by a defense

attorney, name placed on public record and made to testify against a patient.

snip below

----------

No virus found in this outgoing message.

Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.

Version: 7.0.308 / Virus Database: 266.11.10 - Release Date: 5/13/2005

[Guest guest]

Dear ,

I have not had the pleasure of being dragged into civil court, Yet!. Here

in Lubbock they tend to leave us out of those. But, for some odd reason, if you

drink and drive in Lubbock, its going to court. I think mainly its because we

have a defense firm in town that boast a high number of no convictions on DWI.

One of these attorneys has went so far to subpoena me as a paramedic to testify

the signs and symptoms of a head injury and that they can mimic being drunk. He

has his own breathlyzer and all the manuals, you really have to be on top of

your game to testify as peace officer under him. If the this bill is set in

stone I will use it, I just hope private services step up to the plate and

cover there medics in OT wages and civil liability should it arise.

Silsbee EMS wrote:

Have you ever had to testify in court in a insurance law suit either for or

against you patient?

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Re: Re: HB 805 (and SB 14)

Dear Mike,

I am not saying that medics are any different from nurses. I simply stated

that EMS currently maintains an unbiased stance in the community and does not

need more strain of going to court having their personal backgrounds ran through

the ringer.

As you know DWI trials can go several different ways, the ones you think

will get convicted, usually dont and the ones you dont think will even go to

trial get convicted. As a paramedic I have had to testify in several cases

questioning my opinion of the patient/violater and you know as well as I do its

all about the money and the attorney you can hire. snip I just think medics

have a bigger role to fufill then being dragged into court badgered by a defense

attorney, name placed on public record and made to testify against a patient.

snip below

----------

No virus found in this outgoing message.

Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.

Version: 7.0.308 / Virus Database: 266.11.10 - Release Date: 5/13/2005

[Guest guest]

I have done multiple blood draws for law enforcement (both on the dead and

living). If you do these, be prepared to be subpoenaed at the last minute

(sometimes <48 hours notice), sit at the court house for 4 hours, and

testify for 10 minutes. Sometimes the guy pleads and they never tell you and

you sit there like the village idiot. You have no choice but to go or you

will be arrested. If you are a volunteer, be prepared to take off work to

testify (UN reimbursed) and I doubt most EMS employers will pay for

courtroom time.

For all the reasons Gene said, and more, this is a very bad idea.

E. Bledsoe, DO, FACEP

Midlothian, TX

Don't miss EMStock 2005 (http://www.EMStock.com)

Re: Re: Re: HB 805 (and SB 14)

Yes, doing blood draw is a very simple skill. But why the fervent stand to

be kept out of the loop?

Not trying to stir things up, I am far too busy here to need more stuff

stirred up. But trying to understand what the big fear is. If it can help

get one more drunk driver that takes out some innocent folks convicted, I

and all for it. And no, not just because I am a police officer as well as a

paramedic. Had this come around 8 years ago, I would have been for it then,

too.

Moseley, LP

HM2, USNR

Camp Patriot, Kuwait

>

> NM state troopers r carrying narcan auto-injectors.

> Blood draw is a VERY simple skill. Teach LE 2 do it and keep us out of

> the loop. Jim davis

>

[Guest guest]

Just one point and maybe it has already been drawn out but I missed it.

If EMS folks draw the blood for the trooper because " they are standing around

watching the helicopter fly away anyway " , the story doesn't end there. These

medics will then most likely be subpoenad (sp?) for the courtroom testimony

later which means that the employer (who may be a small service provider

struggling to make ends meet and keep 911 calls covered due to minimal staffing)

will have to pay someone to cover (most likely OT) while the medic who drew the

blood sits and waits to testify anywhere from hours to days. There is no

reimbursement for the service for that, and it could theoretically also cause a

severe staffing nightmare. I think there are probably other issues as well, but

that is one that pops into my mind having been subpoenad and having testified

before when we were drawn into a suit against someone else. I was the director

and had to scramble to find someone to cover the truck for a couple of days

while my partner and I (who WERE the full time staff) had to go sit at the

courthouse to testify.

Just my thoughts,

Jane Hill

-------------- Original message from Moseley :

--------------

And just to throw my thoughts in.

I also see both sides of this and that it is in a gray area. But I, too,

have seen many lives ended by drunk drivers and seen even more drunk drivers

not getting the punishment that they deserve because of stupid legal

technicalities, etc. If the blood could be drawn on scene, prior to the

accused patient leaving for the ED, it would make the job of prosecuting

that much easier and very minimal extra time needed to do so on the scene.

Now I am a realist. I know that defense attorneys will try every way they

can to discount the blood draw, where it was done, how it was done, the

scene was dirty, blah blah blah, ad nauseum. But they pick apart every part

of the case anyway. We (the police) know it, the prosecuters know it, the

defense knows it. That is how the game is played. Just another day in the

criminal justice system. If it will help the prosecution to prove the case

in just a few cases, it will be worth it. If folks are scared to testify in

court and companies not willing to pay them overtime while they do so, well,

I don't know what to say about that. I have had to testify once in court as

a Paramedic, before being a cop. It was brutal, but I survived. And it is a

given that I have been to court a number of times now that I am a police

officer. But to tell you the truth, I have never been to court on a DWI

case. The system is so overburdened that there are usually handled in plea

agreements, right or wrong, good or bad. So the worry that a whole slew of

EMTs and Paramedics will be going trudging off to the courthouses in droves,

is not based in reality.

I think it could be a good thing, not without it's own set of problems, but

a good thing as the bill has been narrowed down and amended.

Now all that aside. I am still here in the lovely deserts of Kuwait where

the temperatures are ever rising, up to 109 yesterday with 12% humidity. No

lack of patients to be taken care of here, good job security. I am looking

forward to some leave in 5 weeks when I will be heading back to Texas to

grab the wife and kids and us all head to Hawaii for two weeks of R & R. Then

it is back over here for who knows how long.

Y'all take care and stay safe back at home.

Moseley, LP

HM2, USNR

Camp Patriot, Kuwait

>

> Gene,

>

> I would ask that you read the ammended language of this law. It

> specifically points out that the blood draw request has to be the result of

> an accident where EMS is already on scene, it is up to the paramedic to

> specify if it is possible to do and will not interfer with patient care, and

> all agencies and personnel are protected from any and all liability as a

> result of the needle stick.

>

> The point of the legislation, from the guy who wrote it, is that on the

> most important cases (those involving death and life threatening injuries)

> it would be possible, if the medics are standing around watching the

> helicopter fly the critical trauma patient away, to possibly get blood drawn

> quickly instead of waiting 1 to 2 hours to get the scene cleaned up, the

> patient to the ED, and the procedure done there. That is why this law would

> be in the section of the traffic code that deals with DUI's resulting in

> serious injury or death resulting in a mandatory blood draw...not the

> section where the breath test is waived or the suspect requests a blood

> draw...it doesn't apply there.

>

> Dudley

>

> PS: I have no personal experience with DUI as I have been fortunate enough

> to not have that happen...although I have seen many many many lives ended by

> such needless stupidity and I, for one, would like to do what I can to stop

> this needless death.

>

>

[Guest guest]

Just one point and maybe it has already been drawn out but I missed it.

If EMS folks draw the blood for the trooper because " they are standing around

watching the helicopter fly away anyway " , the story doesn't end there. These

medics will then most likely be subpoenad (sp?) for the courtroom testimony

later which means that the employer (who may be a small service provider

struggling to make ends meet and keep 911 calls covered due to minimal staffing)

will have to pay someone to cover (most likely OT) while the medic who drew the

blood sits and waits to testify anywhere from hours to days. There is no

reimbursement for the service for that, and it could theoretically also cause a

severe staffing nightmare. I think there are probably other issues as well, but

that is one that pops into my mind having been subpoenad and having testified

before when we were drawn into a suit against someone else. I was the director

and had to scramble to find someone to cover the truck for a couple of days

while my partner and I (who WERE the full time staff) had to go sit at the

courthouse to testify.

Just my thoughts,

Jane Hill

-------------- Original message from Moseley :

--------------

And just to throw my thoughts in.

I also see both sides of this and that it is in a gray area. But I, too,

have seen many lives ended by drunk drivers and seen even more drunk drivers

not getting the punishment that they deserve because of stupid legal

technicalities, etc. If the blood could be drawn on scene, prior to the

accused patient leaving for the ED, it would make the job of prosecuting

that much easier and very minimal extra time needed to do so on the scene.

Now I am a realist. I know that defense attorneys will try every way they

can to discount the blood draw, where it was done, how it was done, the

scene was dirty, blah blah blah, ad nauseum. But they pick apart every part

of the case anyway. We (the police) know it, the prosecuters know it, the

defense knows it. That is how the game is played. Just another day in the

criminal justice system. If it will help the prosecution to prove the case

in just a few cases, it will be worth it. If folks are scared to testify in

court and companies not willing to pay them overtime while they do so, well,

I don't know what to say about that. I have had to testify once in court as

a Paramedic, before being a cop. It was brutal, but I survived. And it is a

given that I have been to court a number of times now that I am a police

officer. But to tell you the truth, I have never been to court on a DWI

case. The system is so overburdened that there are usually handled in plea

agreements, right or wrong, good or bad. So the worry that a whole slew of

EMTs and Paramedics will be going trudging off to the courthouses in droves,

is not based in reality.

I think it could be a good thing, not without it's own set of problems, but

a good thing as the bill has been narrowed down and amended.

Now all that aside. I am still here in the lovely deserts of Kuwait where

the temperatures are ever rising, up to 109 yesterday with 12% humidity. No

lack of patients to be taken care of here, good job security. I am looking

forward to some leave in 5 weeks when I will be heading back to Texas to

grab the wife and kids and us all head to Hawaii for two weeks of R & R. Then

it is back over here for who knows how long.

Y'all take care and stay safe back at home.

Moseley, LP

HM2, USNR

Camp Patriot, Kuwait

>

> Gene,

>

> I would ask that you read the ammended language of this law. It

> specifically points out that the blood draw request has to be the result of

> an accident where EMS is already on scene, it is up to the paramedic to

> specify if it is possible to do and will not interfer with patient care, and

> all agencies and personnel are protected from any and all liability as a

> result of the needle stick.

>

> The point of the legislation, from the guy who wrote it, is that on the

> most important cases (those involving death and life threatening injuries)

> it would be possible, if the medics are standing around watching the

> helicopter fly the critical trauma patient away, to possibly get blood drawn

> quickly instead of waiting 1 to 2 hours to get the scene cleaned up, the

> patient to the ED, and the procedure done there. That is why this law would

> be in the section of the traffic code that deals with DUI's resulting in

> serious injury or death resulting in a mandatory blood draw...not the

> section where the breath test is waived or the suspect requests a blood

> draw...it doesn't apply there.

>

> Dudley

>

> PS: I have no personal experience with DUI as I have been fortunate enough

> to not have that happen...although I have seen many many many lives ended by

> such needless stupidity and I, for one, would like to do what I can to stop

> this needless death.

>

>

[Guest guest]

Just one point and maybe it has already been drawn out but I missed it.

If EMS folks draw the blood for the trooper because " they are standing around

watching the helicopter fly away anyway " , the story doesn't end there. These

medics will then most likely be subpoenad (sp?) for the courtroom testimony

later which means that the employer (who may be a small service provider

struggling to make ends meet and keep 911 calls covered due to minimal staffing)

will have to pay someone to cover (most likely OT) while the medic who drew the

blood sits and waits to testify anywhere from hours to days. There is no

reimbursement for the service for that, and it could theoretically also cause a

severe staffing nightmare. I think there are probably other issues as well, but

that is one that pops into my mind having been subpoenad and having testified

before when we were drawn into a suit against someone else. I was the director

and had to scramble to find someone to cover the truck for a couple of days

while my partner and I (who WERE the full time staff) had to go sit at the

courthouse to testify.

Just my thoughts,

Jane Hill

-------------- Original message from Moseley :

--------------

And just to throw my thoughts in.

I also see both sides of this and that it is in a gray area. But I, too,

have seen many lives ended by drunk drivers and seen even more drunk drivers

not getting the punishment that they deserve because of stupid legal

technicalities, etc. If the blood could be drawn on scene, prior to the

accused patient leaving for the ED, it would make the job of prosecuting

that much easier and very minimal extra time needed to do so on the scene.

Now I am a realist. I know that defense attorneys will try every way they

can to discount the blood draw, where it was done, how it was done, the

scene was dirty, blah blah blah, ad nauseum. But they pick apart every part

of the case anyway. We (the police) know it, the prosecuters know it, the

defense knows it. That is how the game is played. Just another day in the

criminal justice system. If it will help the prosecution to prove the case

in just a few cases, it will be worth it. If folks are scared to testify in

court and companies not willing to pay them overtime while they do so, well,

I don't know what to say about that. I have had to testify once in court as

a Paramedic, before being a cop. It was brutal, but I survived. And it is a

given that I have been to court a number of times now that I am a police

officer. But to tell you the truth, I have never been to court on a DWI

case. The system is so overburdened that there are usually handled in plea

agreements, right or wrong, good or bad. So the worry that a whole slew of

EMTs and Paramedics will be going trudging off to the courthouses in droves,

is not based in reality.

I think it could be a good thing, not without it's own set of problems, but

a good thing as the bill has been narrowed down and amended.

Now all that aside. I am still here in the lovely deserts of Kuwait where

the temperatures are ever rising, up to 109 yesterday with 12% humidity. No

lack of patients to be taken care of here, good job security. I am looking

forward to some leave in 5 weeks when I will be heading back to Texas to

grab the wife and kids and us all head to Hawaii for two weeks of R & R. Then

it is back over here for who knows how long.

Y'all take care and stay safe back at home.

Moseley, LP

HM2, USNR

Camp Patriot, Kuwait

>

> Gene,

>

> I would ask that you read the ammended language of this law. It

> specifically points out that the blood draw request has to be the result of

> an accident where EMS is already on scene, it is up to the paramedic to

> specify if it is possible to do and will not interfer with patient care, and

> all agencies and personnel are protected from any and all liability as a

> result of the needle stick.

>

> The point of the legislation, from the guy who wrote it, is that on the

> most important cases (those involving death and life threatening injuries)

> it would be possible, if the medics are standing around watching the

> helicopter fly the critical trauma patient away, to possibly get blood drawn

> quickly instead of waiting 1 to 2 hours to get the scene cleaned up, the

> patient to the ED, and the procedure done there. That is why this law would

> be in the section of the traffic code that deals with DUI's resulting in

> serious injury or death resulting in a mandatory blood draw...not the

> section where the breath test is waived or the suspect requests a blood

> draw...it doesn't apply there.

>

> Dudley

>

> PS: I have no personal experience with DUI as I have been fortunate enough

> to not have that happen...although I have seen many many many lives ended by

> such needless stupidity and I, for one, would like to do what I can to stop

> this needless death.

>

>