EMS Blood Draws on Fatality Accidents

January 9, 2007

In a message dated 1/9/2007 9:42:05 PM Central Standard Time,

wegandy1938@... writes:

Please address each issue in depth and justify your positions.

I believe I heard this line from you originally, Gene, but I've had reason

to use it in the past:

" Counselor, when the facts support your client, pound the facts....when the

law supports your client, pound the law....

When your client is guilty as sin, and neither the facts nor law support

your client, pound the Table! "

ck

S. Krin, DO FAAFP

January 9, 2007

You left out the part about a meteor falling on the cop and the JP falling off a

cliff....and their families suing you too. If you're going to write the next

star trek screen play....make it juicy man.

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

Sent from my BlackBerry Wireless Handheld

Re: Re: EMS Blood Draws on Fatality ACcidents

I propose the following scenarios, and you can figure out which of the

pending proposed statute(s) they relate to:

Number One: You are at the scene of a fatal accident and you have

determined not to attempt resuscitation of one patient who is dead from blunt

trauma.

A Texas State Trooper orders you to draw blood from your patient, who was the

driver of the other vehicle and who has minor injuries. You refuse, because

your service's medical director has not authorized you to draw blood for law

enforcement and because your service's policies and procedures say that all

specimens drawn must be relative to patient care and will be transported to the

hospital where they will be turned over to the attending physician. The

Trooper offers you his blood-draw kit, but you decline to use it because it has

not been within your control, you have no idea whether or not it is contaminated

or not, and because you are unable to accept a medical order from anyone

except your medical director or her designee.

The Trooper arrests you for " failure to obey a lawful order of a law

enforcement officer. "

Number Two: A Justice of the Peace arrives on scene and orders you to draw

blood both from the deceased and from your patient and to turn the samples

over to the Trooper. You refuse for the same reasons set forth above. The

Justice of the Peace orders the Trooper to take you into custody for contempt of

court. The trooper arrests you, handcuffs you, and places you into the back

seat of his car. Your partner, a basic EMT, runs over to your location and

tells the Trooper and you that something is wrong with the patient in the

ambulance. He is not breathing. The Trooper refuses to release you from

custody, and the patient dies from a tension pneumothorax.

You are sued for malpractice by the survivors of the patient who died from

the pneumothorax. You sue the State of Texas and the Trooper and the Justice

of the Peace for violation of your civil rights, as a 3rd party defendant in

the suit against you, alleging that the reason that you were unable to save the

patient was because of their interference. The survivors also file a 1983

lawsuit in federal court against The State of Texas, the Department of Public

Safety, the Justice of the Peace, and you and your employer, alleging a

systematic and legislatively sanctioned violation of the civil rights of their

decedent.

What happens with the Class C misdemeanor filed against you by the trooper?

What offense have you committed. Is there such an offense as " failure to

obey the lawyful order of a law enforcement officer? " What if you plead not

guilty but the same JP finds you guilty? What are your remedies?

What happens with the survivors' suits against you, your company, the State,

the DPS, and the JP?

Who pays for the defense of these cases? Assume that you work for a private

service under contract to the county for EMS service. Will your employer's

malpractice insurance defend this suit? If you have an individual policy

with HPSO, will it defend you?

The survivors file a complaint against you and your partner with DSHS. What

will its position be on this case?

The Attorney General of The State of Texas files a complaint against your

medical director with the State Medical Board for refusing to authorize you to

draw blood under the statutes. Will the medical director's malpractice

insurance defend her against this complaint? What position will the Texas

Medical

Board take on this subject?

Please address each issue in depth and justify your positions.

Gene Gandy.

In a message dated 1/9/07 2:05:53 PM, spiband@...

<mailto:spiband%40yahoo.com> writes:

>

> I believe we are talking about two different bills. Yes, one of then

> requires the JP to get a blood draw on a dead person but HB 259 (below) makes

no

> such distinction.

>

> A BILL TO BE ENTITLED

> AN ACT

> relating to the persons authorized to draw a blood specimen from a vehicle

> operator to test for alcohol concentration or other intoxicating substances.

> BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF TEXAS:

> SECTION 1. Section 724.017, Transportation Code, is amended to read as

> follows:

> Sec. 724.017. TAKING OF BLOOD SPECIMEN. (a) Only the following [a physician,

> qualified technician, chemist, registered professional nurse, or licensed

> vocational nurse] may take a blood specimen at the request or order of a peace

> officer under this chapter:

> (1) a physician;

> (2) a qualified technician;

> (3) a chemist;

> (4) a registered professional nurse;

> (5) a licensed vocational nurse; or

> (6) a licensed or certified emergency medical technician-paramedi (6) a

> licensed or certified emergency medical technician-paramedic or a

licensed

> paramedic, (6) a licensed

> (A) travel to a location solely to take a blood specimen; or

> ( take a blood specimen when the technician-paramedi ( take a blood

> specimen when the technician-paramedic or paramedic reasonably believes

that

> complying with the request or order wou

> ( A [The] blood specimen must be taken according to recognized medical

> procedures [in a sanitary place]. [(] The person who takes a [the] blood

> specimen under this chapter, or the facility [hospital] where a [the] blood

> specimen is taken, is not liable for damages arising from the request or order

of

> the peace officer to take the blood specimen as provided by this chapter if

> the blood specimen was taken according to recognized medical procedures. This

> subsection does not relieve a person from liability for negligence in the

> taking of a blood specimen.

> [© In this section, " qualified technician " does not include emergency

> medical services personnel.]

> SECTION 2. This Act takes effect immediately if it receives a vote of

> two-thirds of all the members elected to each house, as provided by Section

39,

> Article III, Texas Constitution. If this Act does not receive the vote

necessary

> for immediate effect, this Act takes effect September 1, 2007.

>

> Ben Ballard <emtdragon1@... <mailto:emtdragon1%40yahoo.emt> > wrote:

>

> Steve is right if you read all of the info it states

> that the blood shall be drawn from the body of a

> person who died as the result of a motor

> vehicle accident. please read relavant info below.

>

> ____________ ________ ________ ________ ________ _

>

January 10, 2007

I guess I have just gotten to old to argue. I think we are jumping up in revolt

before we see any of the negative things occur. I have been in this business 30

sumpin years and have yet to find a trooper or a J.P who would want to put your

patient in the back of the ambulance at risk. I would approach it in this

manner.

I would tell the trooper or the J.P. that I would like to take care of my

patient and deliver him to the hospital and return to draw the blood provided I

don't get another call in the mean time. The dead guy is the dead guy. Draw the

blood and let DPS or the JP worry about the evidence. Now if I have a patient

that needs care and transport, I will do so or be arrested. I don't think this

would happen to many times in Texas before DPS adopts a different policy. I

really don't think it is going to happen the first time.

You know we (EMS Gods) can come across as rude and uppitty. I think we have the

responsibility to communicate in a professional manner to the DPS or JP that we

must take care of our living patients first. If we are reasonable, I think they

will be also. I know we don't like this being rammed down our throat but

sometimes S- - t Happens.

I don't buy that we are practicing medicine on a dead guy that we are not in the

process of attempting to bring back to light.,

Henry

Re: Re: EMS Blood Draws on Fatality ACcidents

I propose the following scenarios, and you can figure out which of the

pending proposed statute(s) they relate to:

Number One: You are at the scene of a fatal accident and you have

determined not to attempt resuscitation of one patient who is dead from blunt

trauma.

A Texas State Trooper orders you to draw blood from your patient, who was the

driver of the other vehicle and who has minor injuries. You refuse, because

your service's medical director has not authorized you to draw blood for law

enforcement and because your service's policies and procedures say that all

specimens drawn must be relative to patient care and will be transported to

the

hospital where they will be turned over to the attending physician. The

Trooper offers you his blood-draw kit, but you decline to use it because it

has

not been within your control, you have no idea whether or not it is

contaminated

or not, and because you are unable to accept a medical order from anyone

except your medical director or her designee.

The Trooper arrests you for " failure to obey a lawful order of a law

enforcement officer. "

Number Two: A Justice of the Peace arrives on scene and orders you to draw

blood both from the deceased and from your patient and to turn the samples

over to the Trooper. You refuse for the same reasons set forth above. The

Justice of the Peace orders the Trooper to take you into custody for contempt

of

court. The trooper arrests you, handcuffs you, and places you into the back

seat of his car. Your partner, a basic EMT, runs over to your location and

tells the Trooper and you that something is wrong with the patient in the

ambulance. He is not breathing. The Trooper refuses to release you from

custody, and the patient dies from a tension pneumothorax.

You are sued for malpractice by the survivors of the patient who died from

the pneumothorax. You sue the State of Texas and the Trooper and the Justice

of the Peace for violation of your civil rights, as a 3rd party defendant in

the suit against you, alleging that the reason that you were unable to save

the

patient was because of their interference. The survivors also file a 1983

lawsuit in federal court against The State of Texas, the Department of Public

Safety, the Justice of the Peace, and you and your employer, alleging a

systematic and legislatively sanctioned violation of the civil rights of their

decedent.

What happens with the Class C misdemeanor filed against you by the trooper?

What offense have you committed. Is there such an offense as " failure to

obey the lawyful order of a law enforcement officer? " What if you plead not

guilty but the same JP finds you guilty? What are your remedies?

What happens with the survivors' suits against you, your company, the State,

the DPS, and the JP?

Who pays for the defense of these cases? Assume that you work for a private

service under contract to the county for EMS service. Will your employer's

malpractice insurance defend this suit? If you have an individual policy

with HPSO, will it defend you?

The survivors file a complaint against you and your partner with DSHS. What

will its position be on this case?

The Attorney General of The State of Texas files a complaint against your

medical director with the State Medical Board for refusing to authorize you to

draw blood under the statutes. Will the medical director's malpractice

insurance defend her against this complaint? What position will the Texas

Medical

Board take on this subject?

Please address each issue in depth and justify your positions.

Gene Gandy.

>

> I believe we are talking about two different bills. Yes, one of then

> requires the JP to get a blood draw on a dead person but HB 259 (below)

makes no

> such distinction.

>

> A BILL TO BE ENTITLED

> AN ACT

> relating to the persons authorized to draw a blood specimen from a vehicle

> operator to test for alcohol concentration or other intoxicating substances.

> BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF TEXAS:

> SECTION 1. Section 724.017, Transportation Code, is amended to read as

> follows:

> Sec. 724.017. TAKING OF BLOOD SPECIMEN. (a) Only the following [a physician,

> qualified technician, chemist, registered professional nurse, or licensed

> vocational nurse] may take a blood specimen at the request or order of a

peace

> officer under this chapter:

> (1) a physician;

> (2) a qualified technician;

> (3) a chemist;

> (4) a registered professional nurse;

> (5) a licensed vocational nurse; or

> (6) a licensed or certified emergency medical technician-paramedi (6) a

> licensed or certified emergency medical technician-paramedic or a

licensed

> paramedic, (6) a licensed

> (A) travel to a location solely to take a blood specimen; or

> ( take a blood specimen when the technician-paramedi ( take a blood

> specimen when the technician-paramedic or paramedic reasonably believes

that

> complying with the request or order wou

> ( A [The] blood specimen must be taken according to recognized medical

> procedures [in a sanitary place]. [(] The person who takes a [the] blood

> specimen under this chapter, or the facility [hospital] where a [the] blood

> specimen is taken, is not liable for damages arising from the request or

order of

> the peace officer to take the blood specimen as provided by this chapter if

> the blood specimen was taken according to recognized medical procedures.

This

> subsection does not relieve a person from liability for negligence in the

> taking of a blood specimen.

> [© In this section, " qualified technician " does not include emergency

> medical services personnel.]

> SECTION 2. This Act takes effect immediately if it receives a vote of

> two-thirds of all the members elected to each house, as provided by Section

39,

> Article III, Texas Constitution. If this Act does not receive the vote

necessary

> for immediate effect, this Act takes effect September 1, 2007.

>

> Ben Ballard wrote:

>

> Steve is right if you read all of the info it states

> that the blood shall be drawn from the body of a

> person who died as the result of a motor

> vehicle accident. please read relavant info below.

>

> ____________ ________ ________ ________ ________ _

>

January 10, 2007

OK I'll bite on this one.

Se my comments in line and no I am NOT a lawyer etc.

So hence my worthless opinion.

LNM

In a message dated 1/10/2007 2:40:15 P.M. Central Standard Time,

THEDUDMAN@... writes:

EMS says " Nope...can't do it...we don't believe it is the role of EMS to be

doing such things...matter of fact we even sent letters to our state rep

asking him to please not pass legislation the last 3 sessions that would allow

us

to do it...and we were successful " . The Trooper grumbles something about

uncaring...and walks away visibly upset. EMS hangs out on scene another 45

minutes while the last bodies are removed from the vehicle, and then return to

their quarters/home.

I would hope that they have a well written policy on this and that PRIOR to

the events described in your scenario that they have notified the Law

Enforcement agencies that they will not do this on scene and deal with the

concerns

of those agencies in advance of the policy going into effect and certainly in

advance of any incident let alone the nightmare you describe (realistically

I must add)

Interagency cooperation what a concept. .

On such an incident described above this is of course all being said and

done by the EMS Supervisor on the scene not the field crews. In fact if it's

this level of an incident I'd hope the Senior Chief or Service Director would be

on the scene and he'd handle it (in every service I worked for as a Command

Chief It would be me or the guys ambo me period).

Gets the guy to the hospital 2 hours later where he has to wait an

additional hour to get the blood drawn due to low staffing and high patient

levels in

the ED....sends it off for processing and turns the case over to the

prosecutor. Blood results come back at 0.07...and after a lengthy, painful

trial in

the We-Try County Courthouse, the big city boy goes free....acquitted of all

charges but reckless driving.

I'm not an expert on this but I've watched an awful lot of CSI <VBG> I

believe that as long as some time lines are maintained those with the brains in

the evidence world can extrapolate a BAC back to a point in time (as in impact)

with that being used as " proof " of BAC at a given time.

I am sure that it complicates such prosecutions and while I am EXTREMELY

sympathetic to the need to STOP these idiots in their tracks in terms DUI/DWI

as

I've been scraping up dead DUI's and their aftermath sine I was 16 and it is

NEVER pretty it's not in my view a medical function it is an evidentiary one

and I'm not a Crime Scene Tech nor should I be (note the interjection of a

PERSONAL OPINION!). I feel that Medics are there for medical functions and

this is not that it is a medical procedure for evidentiary proposes.

Three weeks after the trial finally is over, We-Try County EMS has its

annual fundraiser sausage supper...and their advertising is very clear " Your

community EMS...we care about you in your time of need " . Funny, neither the

DPS

trooper or any of the folks he has talked to over the past 12 months attends

the fundraiser this year..... Wonder why???

NOW that is a REAL issue and it will (the actions stated above) bite you so

with all the above said and done you had better have a damage control plan and

a well mannered educated PIO to deal with this as there will be fall out in

all likelihood.

Louis N. Molino, Sr., CET

FF/NREMT-B/FSI/EMSI

Freelance Consultant/Trainer/Author/Journalist/Fire Protection Consultant

Buddhist philosopher at-large

LNMolino@...

(Cell Phone)

(Home Phone)

(IFW/TFW/FSS Office)

(IFW/TFW/FSS Fax)

" A Texan with a Jersey Attitude "

" Great minds discuss ideas; Average minds discuss events; Small minds

discuss people " Eleanor Roosevelt - US diplomat & reformer (1884 - 1962)

The comments contained in this E-mail are the opinions of the author and the

author alone. I in no way ever intend to speak for any person or

organization that I am in any way whatsoever involved or associated with unless

I

specifically state that I am doing so. Further this E-mail is intended only for

its

stated recipient and may contain private and or confidential materials

retransmission is strictly prohibited unless placed in the public domain by the

original author.

January 10, 2007

In a message dated 1/9/2007 10:58:15 P.M. Central Standard Time,

kenny.shaw@... writes:

What are your remedies?

To remember your Miranda rights (the one that come sot mind is keeping ones

mouth shut which I CAN do in this case) and to lawyer up ASAP.

Louis N. Molino, Sr., CET

FF/NREMT-B/FSI/EMSI

Freelance Consultant/Trainer/Author/Journalist/Fire Protection Consultant

Buddhist philosopher at-large

LNMolino@...

(Cell Phone)

(Home Phone)

(IFW/TFW/FSS Office)

(IFW/TFW/FSS Fax)

" A Texan with a Jersey Attitude "

" Great minds discuss ideas; Average minds discuss events; Small minds

discuss people " Eleanor Roosevelt - US diplomat & reformer (1884 - 1962)

The comments contained in this E-mail are the opinions of the author and the

author alone. I in no way ever intend to speak for any person or

organization that I am in any way whatsoever involved or associated with unless

I

specifically state that I am doing so. Further this E-mail is intended only for

its

stated recipient and may contain private and or confidential materials

retransmission is strictly prohibited unless placed in the public domain by the

original author.

January 10, 2007

You have a very good memory!

GG

>

> In a message dated 1/9/2007 9:42:05 PM Central Standard Time,

> wegandy1938@wegandy writes:

>

> Please address each issue in depth and justify your positions.

>

> I believe I heard this line from you originally, Gene, but I've had reason

> to use it in the past:

>

> " Counselor, when the facts support your client, pound the facts....when the

> law supports your client, pound the law....

>

> When your client is guilty as sin, and neither the facts nor law support

> your client, pound the Table! "

>

> ck

> S. Krin, DO FAAFP

>

January 10, 2007

Henry,

On the intelligence of Texas Justices of the Peace:

Just down the road, another service was called to an obvious " dead on scene "

case the other day. They advised the Sheriffs that they would not be

resuscitating and to notify the JP. The JP refused to respond because " EMS had

already pronounced the patient dead, so there was nothing for him to do. I

think

he's the same one that said, some years back, that EMS personnel could not

stop working a patient until HE arrived on the scene, regardless of what the

physician medical director said.

I don't know what happened to the patient. He may still be " legally

undead. "

These are the exact sorts of idiots that I fear having the power to ORDER

medics to do medical things.

I'm not so worried about the DPS guys. The more recent ones have actually

shown some common sense. Most of the old idiots have retired, but there are

still some around. Most of them are sergeants now.

Either way, beginning to do blood draws on the order of anyone but a

physician is to begin the slide down a slippery slope.

Be careful what you wish for. You just might get it.

G

>

> I guess I have just gotten to old to argue. I think we are jumping up in

> revolt before we see any of the negative things occur. I have been in this

> business 30 sumpin years and have yet to find a trooper or a J.P who would

want to

> put your patient in the back of the ambulance at risk. I would approach it

> in this manner.

>

> I would tell the trooper or the J.P. that I would like to take care of my

> patient and deliver him to the hospital and return to draw the blood provided

I

> don't get another call in the mean time. The dead guy is the dead guy. Draw

> the blood and let DPS or the JP worry about the evidence. Now if I have a

> patient that needs care and transport, I will do so or be arrested. I don't

> think this would happen to many times in Texas before DPS adopts a different

> policy. I really don't think it is going to happen the first time.

>

> You know we (EMS Gods) can come across as rude and uppitty. I think we have

> the responsibility to communicate in a professional manner to the DPS or JP

> that we must take care of our living patients first. If we are reasonable, I

> think they will be also. I know we don't like this being rammed down our

> throat but sometimes S- - t Happens.

>

> I don't buy that we are practicing medicine on a dead guy that we are not in

> the process of attempting to bring back to light.,

>

> Henry

> Re: Re: EMS Blood Draws on Fatality ACcidents

>

> I propose the following scenarios, and you can figure out which of the

> pending proposed statute(s) they relate to:

>

> Number One: You are at the scene of a fatal accident and you have

> determined not to attempt resuscitation of one patient who is dead from

> blunt trauma.

> A Texas State Trooper orders you to draw blood from your patient, who was

> the

> driver of the other vehicle and who has minor injuries. You refuse, because

> your service's medical director has not authorized you to draw blood for law

> enforcement and because your service's policies and procedures say that all

> specimens drawn must be relative to patient care and will be transported to

> the

> hospital where they will be turned over to the attending physician. The

> Trooper offers you his blood-draw kit, but you decline to use it because it

> has

> not been within your control, you have no idea whether or not it is

> contaminated

> or not, and because you are unable to accept a medical order from anyone

> except your medical director or her designee.

>

> The Trooper arrests you for " failure to obey a lawful order of a law

> enforcement officer. "

>

> Number Two: A Justice of the Peace arrives on scene and orders you to draw

> blood both from the deceased and from your patient and to turn the samples

> over to the Trooper. You refuse for the same reasons set forth above. The

> Justice of the Peace orders the Trooper to take you into custody for

> contempt of

> court. The trooper arrests you, handcuffs you, and places you into the back

> seat of his car. Your partner, a basic EMT, runs over to your location and

> tells the Trooper and you that something is wrong with the patient in the

> ambulance. He is not breathing. The Trooper refuses to release you from

> custody, and the patient dies from a tension pneumothorax.

>

> You are sued for malpractice by the survivors of the patient who died from

> the pneumothorax. You sue the State of Texas and the Trooper and the Justice

> of the Peace for violation of your civil rights, as a 3rd party defendant in

> the suit against you, alleging that the reason that you were unable to save

> the

> patient was because of their interference. The survivors also file a 1983

> lawsuit in federal court against The State of Texas, the Department of

> Public

> Safety, the Justice of the Peace, and you and your employer, alleging a

> systematic and legislatively sanctioned violation of the civil rights of

> their

> decedent.

>

> What happens with the Class C misdemeanor filed against you by the trooper?

> What offense have you committed. Is there such an offense as " failure to

> obey the lawyful order of a law enforcement officer? " What if you plead not

> guilty but the same JP finds you guilty? What are your remedies?

>

> What happens with the survivors' suits against you, your company, the State,

> the DPS, and the JP?

>

> Who pays for the defense of these cases? Assume that you work for a private

> service under contract to the county for EMS service. Will your employer's

> malpractice insurance defend this suit? If you have an individual policy

> with HPSO, will it defend you?

>

> The survivors file a complaint against you and your partner with DSHS. What

> will its position be on this case?

>

> The Attorney General of The State of Texas files a complaint against your

> medical director with the State Medical Board for refusing to authorize you

> to

> draw blood under the statutes. Will the medical director's malpractice

> insurance defend her against this complaint? What position will the Texas

> Medical

> Board take on this subject?

>

> Please address each issue in depth and justify your positions.

>

> Gene Gandy.

>

> >

> > I believe we are talking about two different bills. Yes, one of then

> > requires the JP to get a blood draw on a dead person but HB 259 (below)

> makes no

> > such distinction.

> >

> > A BILL TO BE ENTITLED

> > AN ACT

> > relating to the persons authorized to draw a blood specimen from a vehicle

> > operator to test for alcohol concentration or other intoxicating

> substances.

> > BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF TEXAS:

> > SECTION 1. Section 724.017, Transportation Code, is amended to read as

> > follows:

> > Sec. 724.017. TAKING OF BLOOD SPECIMEN. (a) Only the following [a

> physician,

> > qualified technician, chemist, registered professional nurse, or licensed

> > vocational nurse] may take a blood specimen at the request or order of a

> peace

> > officer under this chapter:

> > (1) a physician;

> > (2) a qualified technician;

> > (3) a chemist;

> > (4) a registered professional nurse;

> > (5) a licensed vocational nurse; or

> > (6) a licensed or certified emergency medical technician-paramedi (6) a

> > licensed or certified emergency medical technician-paramedic or a

> licensed

> > paramedic, (6) a licensed

> > (A) travel to a location solely to take a blood specimen; or

> > ( take a blood specimen when the technician-paramedi ( take a blood

> > specimen when the technician-paramedic or paramedic reasonably

> believes that

> > complying with the request or order wou

> > ( A [The] blood specimen must be taken according to recognized medical

> > procedures [in a sanitary place]. [(] The person who takes a [the] blood

> > specimen under this chapter, or the facility [hospital] where a [the]

> blood

> > specimen is taken, is not liable for damages arising from the request or

> order of

> > the peace officer to take the blood specimen as provided by this chapter

> if

> > the blood specimen was taken according to recognized medical procedures.

> This

> > subsection does not relieve a person from liability for negligence in the

> > taking of a blood specimen.

> > [© In this section, " qualified technician " does not include emergency

> > medical services personnel.]

> > SECTION 2. This Act takes effect immediately if it receives a vote of

> > two-thirds of all the members elected to each house, as provided by

> Section 39,

> > Article III, Texas Constitution. If this Act does not receive the vote

> necessary

> > for immediate effect, this Act takes effect September 1, 2007.

> >

> > Ben Ballard wrote:

> >

> > Steve is right if you read all of the info it states

> > that the blood shall be drawn from the body of a

> > person who died as the result of a motor

> > vehicle accident. please read relavant info below.

> >

> > ____________ ________ ________ ________ ________ _

> >

January 10, 2007

My answer is to do what Arizona does. It trains certain police officers as

phlebotomists to draw the blood. It's similar to police departments training

SOME officers to use the Breathalyzer. So in my version of this scenario,

the trooper would call out the designated phlebotomist for his county and the

matter would be taken care of.

BTW, there have been a number of lawsuits in AZ over field blood draws,

alleging everything from unsanitary conditions to improper equipment, et cetera.

And that's with the cops doing it. I was approached by one plaintiff's

lawyer to testify and I refused.

If we allow medics to do it, you can bet there will be the same bunch of

lawsuits in Texas. Count on it.

We still have not addressed the medical practice aspects. There is a

difference in a physician drawing the blood in the ER, or ordering a nurse to do

it,

and an EMS medical director ordering it in the field.

Do the medical directors REALLY want to open the door to having lay people

able to mandate medical procedures?

Dudley, will your medical director authorize this procedure through protocol

and standing order? Or do you take the position that the law will supercede

the physician's control over the medics who work under his/her license?

I would like to hear some debate on this aspect.

Gene

>

> Good answers one and all Henry.

>

> DPS and other LEO folks as well as prosecutors want EMS included into the

> realm of those who CAN draw blood on DUI accidents that involve fatalities or

> possible fatalities. They already go to the hospitals to do this now....and

> DPS provides the blood draw kit to the ED staff...who draw the blood.

>

> It seems odd but I haven't seen any recent articles of ED nurses or

> physicians getting arrested for caring for their ED patients while the DUI

suspect

> sits and waits....BUT I have read in this HB proposed that EMS is the only

> healthcare profession listed that can " opt out " of doing the draw if they have

> another patient to tend to.

>

> Gene, its a cool scenario...but we aren't on the bleeding edge with this

> one...we are attempting to allow the only health care professionals

specifically

> exempted in this legislation to be included...there are several states that

> allow this now...and there are not a plethora of lawsuits for EMS personnel

> getting arrested and patients dying....not saying it can't happen....just

> saying its highly unlikely....

>

> What about this one though...Possible drunk driver from Big-Cityville

> crosses over the center-line of Hwy TNW outside Anywhere Texas...striking a

car

> loaded with 3 couples from the High School prom head-on...We- What about this

> one though...Possible drunk driver from Big-Cityville crosses over the

> center-line of Hwy TNW outside Anywhere Texas...striking a car loaded with 3

couples

> from the High School prom head-on...We-Try County EMS shows up with 2

> ambulances. Unfortunately, 5 of the six teenagers are dead but the remaining

> one is finally extricated and loaded onto a helicopter with critical life

> threatening injuries and flown to the closest Level II trauma center....45

minutes

> by ai

>

> DPS approaches the two EMS crews still on scene cleaning up equipment and

> " de-briefing " from the accident. He has a blood-draw kit in his hands and asks

> " can one of you medics draw blood on this guy...I'm going to be out here for

> another 90 minutes or so and then it is over 30 minutes to Podunk ED...I

> wanna get this blood drawn now if possible. "

>

> EMS says " Nope...can' EMS says " Nope...can't do it...we don't believe

> it is the role of EMS to be doing such things...matter of fact we even sent

> letters to our state rep asking him to please not pass legislation the last 3

> sessions that would allow us to do it...and we were successful " . The Trooper

> grumbles something about uncaring...and walks away visibly upset. EMS hangs

> out on scene another 45 minutes while the last bodies are removed from the

> vehicle, and then retur

>

> Gets the guy to the hospital 2 hours later where he has to wait an

> additional hour to get the blood drawn due to low staffing and high patient

levels in

> the ED....sends it off for processing and turns the case over to the

> prosecutor. Blood results come back at 0.07...and after a lengthy, painful

trial in

> the We-Try County Courthouse, the big city boy goes free....acquitted of all

> charges but reckless driving.

>

> Three weeks after the trial finally is over, We-Try County EMS has its

> annual fundraiser sausage supper...and their advertising is very clear " Your

> community EMS...we care about you in your time of need " . Funny, neither the

DPS

> trooper or any of the folks he has talked to over the past 12 months attends

> the fundraiser this year..... Wonder why???

>

> Dudley

>

> PS: 3 members of " We Try County EMS " testified or were subpoenaed for trial

> since they interviewed and assessed the defendant...

>

> Re: Re: EMS Blood Draws on Fatality ACcidents

>

> I guess I have just gotten to old to argue. I think we are jumping up in

> revolt before we see any of the negative things occur. I have been in this

> business 30 sumpin years and have yet to find a trooper or a J.P who would

want to

> put your patient in the back of the ambulance at risk. I would approach it

> in this manner.

>

> I would tell the trooper or the J.P. that I would like to take care of my

> patient and deliver him to the hospital and return to draw the blood provided

I

> don't get another call in the mean time. The dead guy is the dead guy. Draw

> the blood and let DPS or the JP worry about the evidence. Now if I have a

> patient that needs care and transport, I will do so or be arrested. I don't

> think this would happen to many times in Texas before DPS adopts a different

> policy. I really don't think it is going to happen the first time.

>

> You know we (EMS Gods) can come across as rude and uppitty. I think we have

> the responsibility to communicate in a professional manner to the DPS or JP

> that we must take care of our living patients first. If we are reasonable, I

> think they will be also. I know we don't like this being rammed down our

> throat but sometimes S- - t Happens.

>

> I don't buy that we are practicing medicine on a dead guy that we are not in

> the process of attempting to bring back to light.,

>

> Henry

> Re: Re: EMS Blood Draws on Fatality ACcidents

>

> I propose the following scenarios, and you can figure out which of the

> pending proposed statute(s) they relate to:

>

> Number One: You are at the scene of a fatal accident and you have

> determined not to attempt resuscitation of one patient who is dead from

> blunt trauma.

> A Texas State Trooper orders you to draw blood from your patient, who was

> the

> driver of the other vehicle and who has minor injuries. You refuse, because

> your service's medical director has not authorized you to draw blood for law

> enforcement and because your service's policies and procedures say that all

> specimens drawn must be relative to patient care and will be transported to

> the

> hospital where they will be turned over to the attending physician. The

> Trooper offers you his blood-draw kit, but you decline to use it because it

> has

> not been within your control, you have no idea whether or not it is

> contaminated

> or not, and because you are unable to accept a medical order from anyone

> except your medical director or her designee.

>

> The Trooper arrests you for " failure to obey a lawful order of a law

> enforcement officer. "

>

> Number Two: A Justice of the Peace arrives on scene and orders you to draw

> blood both from the deceased and from your patient and to turn the samples

> over to the Trooper. You refuse for the same reasons set forth above. The

> Justice of the Peace orders the Trooper to take you into custody for

> contempt of

> court. The trooper arrests you, handcuffs you, and places you into the back

> seat of his car. Your partner, a basic EMT, runs over to your location and

> tells the Trooper and you that something is wrong with the patient in the

> ambulance. He is not breathing. The Trooper refuses to release you from

> custody, and the patient dies from a tension pneumothorax.

>

> You are sued for malpractice by the survivors of the patient who died from

> the pneumothorax. You sue the State of Texas and the Trooper and the Justice

> of the Peace for violation of your civil rights, as a 3rd party defendant in

> the suit against you, alleging that the reason that you were unable to save

> the

> patient was because of their interference. The survivors also file a 1983

> lawsuit in federal court against The State of Texas, the Department of

> Public

> Safety, the Justice of the Peace, and you and your employer, alleging a

> systematic and legislatively sanctioned violation of the civil rights of

> their

> decedent.

>

> What happens with the Class C misdemeanor filed against you by the trooper?

> What offense have you committed. Is there such an offense as " failure to

> obey the lawyful order of a law enforcement officer? " What if you plead not

> guilty but the same JP finds you guilty? What are your remedies?

>

> What happens with the survivors' suits against you, your company, the State,

> the DPS, and the JP?

>

> Who pays for the defense of these cases? Assume that you work for a private

> service under contract to the county for EMS service. Will your employer's

> malpractice insurance defend this suit? If you have an individual policy

> with HPSO, will it defend you?

>

> The survivors file a complaint against you and your partner with DSHS. What

> will its position be on this case?

>

> The Attorney General of The State of Texas files a complaint against your

> medical director with the State Medical Board for refusing to authorize you

> to

> draw blood under the statutes. Will the medical director's malpractice

> insurance defend her against this complaint? What position will the Texas

> Medical

> Board take on this subject?

>

> Please address each issue in depth and justify your positions.

>

> Gene Gandy.

>

> >

> > I believe we are talking about two different bills. Yes, one of then

> > requires the JP to get a blood draw on a dead person but HB 259 (below)

> makes no

> > such distinction.

> >

> > A BILL TO BE ENTITLED

> > AN ACT

> > relating to the persons authorized to draw a blood specimen from a vehicle

> > operator to test for alcohol concentration or other intoxicating

> substances.

> > BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF TEXAS:

> > SECTION 1. Section 724.017, Transportation Code, is amended to read as

> > follows:

> > Sec. 724.017. TAKING OF BLOOD SPECIMEN. (a) Only the following [a

> physician,

> > qualified technician, chemist, registered professional nurse, or licensed

> > vocational nurse] may take a blood specimen at the request or order of a

> peace

> > officer under this chapter:

> > (1) a physician;

> > (2) a qualified technician;

> > (3) a chemist;

> > (4) a registered professional nurse;

> > (5) a licensed vocational nurse; or

> > (6) a licensed or certified emergency medical technician-paramedi (6) a

> > licensed or certified emergency medical technician-paramedic or a

> licensed

> > paramedic, (6) a licensed

> > (A) travel to a location solely to take a blood specimen; or

> > ( take a blood specimen when the technician-paramedi ( take a blood

> > specimen when the technician-paramedic or paramedic reasonably

> believes that

> > complying with the request or order wou

> > ( A [The] blood specimen must be taken according to recognized medical

> > procedures [in a sanitary place]. [(] The person who takes a [the] blood

> > specimen under this chapter, or the facility [hospital] where a [the]

> blood

> > specimen is taken, is not liable for damages arising from the request or

> order of

> > the peace officer to take the blood specimen as provided by this chapter

> if

> > the blood specimen was taken according to recognized medical procedures.

> This

> > subsection does not relieve a person from liability for negligence in the

> > taking of a blood specimen.

> > [© In this section, " qualified technician " does not include emergency

> > medical services personnel.]

> > SECTION 2. This Act takes effect immediately if it receives a vote of

> > two-thirds of all the members elected to each house, as provided by

> Section 39,

> > Article III, Texas Constitution. If this Act does not receive the vote

> necessary

> > for immediate effect, this Act takes effect September 1, 2007.

> >

> > Ben Ballard wrote:

> >

> > Steve is right if you read all of the info it states

> > that the blood shall be drawn from the body of a

> > person who died as the result of a motor

> > vehicle accident. please read relavant info below.

> >

> > ____________ ________ ________ ________ ________ _

> >

January 10, 2007

Good answers one and all Henry.

DPS and other LEO folks as well as prosecutors want EMS included into the realm

of those who CAN draw blood on DUI accidents that involve fatalities or possible

fatalities. They already go to the hospitals to do this now....and DPS provides

the blood draw kit to the ED staff...who draw the blood.

It seems odd but I haven't seen any recent articles of ED nurses or physicians

getting arrested for caring for their ED patients while the DUI suspect sits and

waits....BUT I have read in this HB proposed that EMS is the only healthcare

profession listed that can " opt out " of doing the draw if they have another

patient to tend to.

Gene, its a cool scenario...but we aren't on the bleeding edge with this

one...we are attempting to allow the only health care professionals specifically

exempted in this legislation to be included...there are several states that

allow this now...and there are not a plethora of lawsuits for EMS personnel

getting arrested and patients dying....not saying it can't happen....just saying

its highly unlikely....

What about this one though...Possible drunk driver from Big-Cityville crosses

over the center-line of Hwy TNW outside Anywhere Texas...striking a car loaded

with 3 couples from the High School prom head-on...We-Try County EMS shows up

with 2 ambulances. Unfortunately, 5 of the six teenagers are dead but the

remaining one is finally extricated and loaded onto a helicopter with critical

life threatening injuries and flown to the closest Level II trauma center....45

minutes by air. The possible DUI driver appears uninjured through multiple

assessments by EMS and is adamant about not going to the hospital by EMS. DPS,

local sheriff, EMS, try repeatedly to get him checked out but he refuses.

DPS approaches the two EMS crews still on scene cleaning up equipment and

" de-briefing " from the accident. He has a blood-draw kit in his hands and asks

" can one of you medics draw blood on this guy...I'm going to be out here for

another 90 minutes or so and then it is over 30 minutes to Podunk ED...I wanna

get this blood drawn now if possible. "

EMS says " Nope...can't do it...we don't believe it is the role of EMS to be

doing such things...matter of fact we even sent letters to our state rep asking

him to please not pass legislation the last 3 sessions that would allow us to do

it...and we were successful " . The Trooper grumbles something about

uncaring...and walks away visibly upset. EMS hangs out on scene another 45

minutes while the last bodies are removed from the vehicle, and then return to

their quarters/home.

Gets the guy to the hospital 2 hours later where he has to wait an additional

hour to get the blood drawn due to low staffing and high patient levels in the

ED....sends it off for processing and turns the case over to the prosecutor.

Blood results come back at 0.07...and after a lengthy, painful trial in the

We-Try County Courthouse, the big city boy goes free....acquitted of all charges

but reckless driving.

Three weeks after the trial finally is over, We-Try County EMS has its annual

fundraiser sausage supper...and their advertising is very clear " Your community

EMS...we care about you in your time of need " . Funny, neither the DPS trooper

or any of the folks he has talked to over the past 12 months attends the

fundraiser this year..... Wonder why???

Dudley

PS: 3 members of " We Try County EMS " testified or were subpoenaed for trial

since they interviewed and assessed the defendant....