You're wise to be discussing this with your work group. It's much better to get these things worked out in advance, rather than under the pressure of the moment.
As you point out, one of the first things a new patient gets is a whole panel of blood tests so that treatment can be planned. That evidence is in independent, trustworthy hands (the hospital) and is surely available on competent legal authority. So why the heck was Detective Payne in such a major sweat to get an independent sample? That just makes no sense to me. I can't think of any legitimate reason for it.
I had not seen the Salt Lake Tribune videos until they were posted here. But we see Nurse Wubbel holding a document and explaining that it is the governing agreement between the police and the hospital, and that it stipulates that in order for him to have a sample, the patient has to be under arrest, or give consent, or a warrant is needed. The officer says, "So you're saying I'm not getting blood?". She stammers for an instant, and he proceeds to arrest her.
The video of the COP and Mayor's press conference contains the tidbit that the blood draw policy has been revised. I'll bet the policy was not liberalized.
My thought question for the moment is this:
If someone saunters into your ED, and announces that he's Hoboken Harry and His Traveling Phlebotomy Show, and that he's here to draw blood from one of your unconscious patients, are you going to let him? Knowing you from your posts, I think you are much more likely to ask your security to help you vigorously escort Harry out the door. ("And don't come back. Or the horse you rode in on.")
So the next question is, in this case, what authority does the police officer have that Hoboken Harry does not? He's not investigating a case. He has no warrant to serve. There is no possible exigency, because there is no open case against the unconscious patient. There are no laws being broken by anyone present. There is an existing policy between the hospital and the officer's Chief of Police that governs the case, and it says "no blood draw". What authority does the officer have to act?
If he has no authority to act, what is your obligation to your patient?
I think almost everyone here on the board treats our LEOs with respect and courtesy, as they ordinarily deserve. But I don't think any of us should assume that all orders or requests are lawful and should be granted. Studying Milgram's experiment on obedience to authority while I was in college rather permanently gave me a particular mindset. I suspect that yours may be about the same.
Great post, thanks
Give a man a fish and he eats for a day. Give a man a welfare check, a forty ounce malt liquor, a crack pipe, an Obama phone, free health insurance. and some Air Jordan's and he votes Democrat for a lifetime.
