Obligation to Police

[gro2001]

I understand this is an art, but everybody here should be fairly comfortable in terms of answering questions without answering questions. As in, not actually disclosing any information not readily apparent and available. For example, "yes, he arrived deceased. No, I'm very sorry officer, I don't know long he had been dead. I don't have any experience with that. How else could I help you?" A big part of that art is not announcing to police ahead of time what you won't be sharing with them or won't be doing, but instead demonstrating nominal effort while always being exceedingly polite.

I don't quite get the CNN clip above. Are the police demanding the nurse draw blood for them? Or are they asking her to get out of the way so they can draw blood? It seems relevant, but I see conflicting reports on that even in the Wikipedia article on the event. Either way, I think I would have told the police officers what hospital policies are based on the hospital's (not my) interpretation of the law, but also made it very clear that it wasn't my role to stop them from doing their job as they saw fit. Ultimately what happens with a blood sample is a judge's role, right? I can't imagine a licensing board (or malpractice jury) to expect a nurse or doctor to physically or even verbally prevent a police officer from doing anything. If they were demanding that she draw blood for them that's a bit different, but in that case I think you could probably explain that you aren't able to draw a separate sample for them, but then ALSO explain that all blood samples were saved for several days at the lab and it's very likely they would be able to get any special tests they wanted run on that blood in the future. None of this excuses the police officer's behavior. It was grossly inappropriate, he was rightfully fired and the nurse received a relatively large settlement from Salt Lake City. I'm just trying to see how the situation could have been de-escalated since emotions were so high (the victim was an off duty police officer).

When a similar event happened in my hospital that led to our charge RN being arrested, the police officer was demanding the nurse draw the blood for him so he could take it into evidence.

They actually would not be able to use the blood we send to the lab. Or at the very least that evidence would be very easy to throw out as routine labs in a hospital do no maintain a chain of custody. We just tube them up to the lab. Who knows what nefarious forces may interfere with them on the way.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[MechEDoc]

6 years of law enforcement experience (3 local and 3 federal) before making the career change to keeping people alive long after their expiration date. Thus, I probably have a bit of a different take than many on this forum.

The rule “never talk to the police” and “talking to the police can never help you” sounds like great advice for people who don’t have the common sense to distinguish when the interaction is because they are a suspect, witness, or victim of crime.

In other words, I’m curious to know if the law enforcement mutes follow their own advice when the cops show up because that patient’s family member kicked THEIR ass for not refilling the oxy, or someone put a gun in THEIR face in the parking deck and demanded the car keys. Or, do you follow your own advice, refuse to talk to the cops, and just go home and put an ice pack on your face?

Keep in mind that many crimes are solved by witnesses willing to come forward and, you know, talk to the police.

I'm a "never talk to the police guy", but I'm not that black and white in my thinking.

I talk with the police all the time, e.g.

• On shift.
• If I get pulled over (turns out acting like a normal person seems to be really appreciated and I usually just get a warning, they probably like having a drama free encouter with someone who's sober and not a jerk).
• Calling in that a sketchy guy is hiding on my property. You know what I don't need to do? Get in a fight, maybe even a gun fight with a sketchy guy if I can help it. My life and my loved ones' lives weren't in danger, let someone else deal with it. They did, with a dog.

What I don't do is just talk to curious cops who are just looking to clear things up...

 

[skougess]

I’m not sure why this keeps getting twisted. Obviously there are situations where calling the police is a prudent move.

The thread was regarding being asked questions by police unsolicited, and by extension, any other unsolicited request/citation/confrontation by police.

Is it possible to have a non-pedantic discussion on the internet that doesn’t get taken to the absolute extreme?

 

[MechEDoc]

Is it possible to have a non-pedantic discussion on the internet that doesn’t get taken to the absolute extreme?

Probably not, it's the internet.

 

[Apollyon]

Is it possible to have a non-pedantic discussion on the internet that doesn’t get taken to the absolute extreme?

It's kinda "baked in", or the <<raison d'etre>>.

 

[comp1]

None of it seems extreme until all at once it becomes so. The entirety of the discussion seems quite germane to the OP's original post. Apparently the OP is just fortunate they weren't told they were obstructing an investigation and arrested. And yes, this all is indeed the purpose of the internet.

 

[ShockIndex]

I'm a "never talk to the police guy", but I'm not that black and white in my thinking.

I talk with the police all the time, e.g.

• On shift.
• If I get pulled over (turns out acting like a normal person seems to be really appreciated and I usually just get a warning, they probably like having a drama free encouter with someone who's sober and not a jerk).
• Calling in that a sketchy guy is hiding on my property. You know what I don't need to do? Get in a fight, maybe even a gun fight with a sketchy guy if I can help it. My life and my loved ones' lives weren't in danger, let someone else deal with it. They did, with a dog.

What I don't do is just talk to curious cops who are just looking to clear things up...

What you wrote is far more rational than the overwhelming majority of posts and likes in this thread. However, I will point out that it is incumbent on you to be willing to have a mature and rational discourse with curious cops, and this often begins with a statement that goes something like this, “Hey Officer, we have rather strict privacy laws that govern what patient information we can release. Help me understand the nature of your investigation so that I can better determine if I’m allowed to discuss this with you.” I’m far more likely to be helpful to an officer is trying to determine if the girl in bed 6 is being trafficked, than say an officer who is trying to determine if the drunk guy in bed 7 was the driver or passenger.

I’m not sure why this keeps getting twisted. Obviously there are situations where calling the police is a prudent move.

The thread was regarding being asked questions by police unsolicited, and by extension, any other unsolicited request/citation/confrontation by police.

Is it possible to have a non-pedantic discussion on the internet that doesn’t get taken to the absolute extreme?

It started getting twisted when you posted the ridiculous and false claim that talking to the police, “can ONLY get you in trouble.” That’s insane. It really went off the rails when a forum moderator posted a video about not trying to talk your way out of an arrest as if it’s somehow pertinent to interactions with police as part of our jobs. Seriously, they couldn’t tell the difference between free legal advice to suspects being detained by the police versus how we as EPs should be interacting with cops as part of our jobs? So yes, some people should never talk to the police and a select few should probably even avoid eye contact.

There are literally hundreds of EP-police discussions each day that involve rational discourse about crimes committed in our communities. The overwhelming majority are legal, compliant with HIPAA, serve the greater good of our society, and come at no harm to the physician. In fact interacting with LE is such an integral part of our jobs as emergency physicians that our residencies often have shared didactic instruction with LE (ie range day, lectures on ballistics and wounding, SWAT operations, preservation of evidence, etc).

 

[gruemd]

What you wrote is far more rational than the overwhelming majority of posts and likes in this thread. However, I will point out that it is incumbent on you to be willing to have a mature and rational discourse with curious cops, and this often begins with a statement that goes something like this, “Hey Officer, we have rather strict privacy laws that govern what patient information we can release. Help me understand the nature of your investigation so that I can better determine if I’m allowed to discuss this with you.” I’m far more likely to be helpful to an officer is trying to determine if the girl in bed 6 is being trafficked, than say an officer who is trying to determine if the drunk guy in bed 7 was the driver or passenger.

It started getting twisted when you posted the ridiculous and false claim that talking to the police, “can ONLY get you in trouble.” That’s insane. It really went off the rails when a forum moderator posted a video about not trying to talk your way out of an arrest as if it’s somehow pertinent to interactions with police as part of our jobs. Seriously, they couldn’t tell the difference between free legal advice to suspects being detained by the police versus how we as EPs should be interacting with cops as part of our jobs? So yes, some people should never talk to the police and a select few should probably even avoid eye contact.

There are literally hundreds of EP-police discussions each day that involve rational discourse about crimes committed in our communities. The overwhelming majority are legal, compliant with HIPAA, serve the greater good of our society, and come at no harm to the physician. In fact interacting with LE is such an integral part of our jobs as emergency physicians that our residencies often have shared didactic instruction with LE (ie range day, lectures on ballistics and wounding, SWAT operations, preservation of evidence, etc).

It is a perfectly rational take to say that discourse with police has the potential to be twisted and used against you, or in the context of the OP, to be possibly professionally disadvantageous. Not only have people replied with personal anecdotes about this, but there's also, you know, the national zeitgeist regarding police brutality, unwarranted killings, false arrests, police being able to outright lie to you whenever it serves them, etc etc over the past several decades that gives anyone a very good reason to pause before interacting with police, easily capsulized into "don't talk to the police."

It's not hard to conceptualize that one can simultaneously hold those views and still be cordial with police officers in our line of work. I and others have said this in this very thread, and this narrative of "oh so you wouldn't call 911 if someone is killing your grandmother, checkmate" feels more than a bit disingenuous from what you could probably surmise was being said.

 

[Rendar5]

What you wrote is far more rational than the overwhelming majority of posts and likes in this thread. However, I will point out that it is incumbent on you to be willing to have a mature and rational discourse with curious cops, and this often begins with a statement that goes something like this, “Hey Officer, we have rather strict privacy laws that govern what patient information we can release. Help me understand the nature of your investigation so that I can better determine if I’m allowed to discuss this with you.” I’m far more likely to be helpful to an officer is trying to determine if the girl in bed 6 is being trafficked, than say an officer who is trying to determine if the drunk guy in bed 7 was the driver or passenger.

It started getting twisted when you posted the ridiculous and false claim that talking to the police, “can ONLY get you in trouble.” That’s insane. It really went off the rails when a forum moderator posted a video about not trying to talk your way out of an arrest as if it’s somehow pertinent to interactions with police as part of our jobs. Seriously, they couldn’t tell the difference between free legal advice to suspects being detained by the police versus how we as EPs should be interacting with cops as part of our jobs? So yes, some people should never talk to the police and a select few should probably even avoid eye contact.

There are literally hundreds of EP-police discussions each day that involve rational discourse about crimes committed in our communities. The overwhelming majority are legal, compliant with HIPAA, serve the greater good of our society, and come at no harm to the physician. In fact interacting with LE is such an integral part of our jobs as emergency physicians that our residencies often have shared didactic instruction with LE (ie range day, lectures on ballistics and wounding, SWAT operations, preservation of evidence, etc).

It’s not always easy to know when they’re asking for your help and actually investigating you. Maybe you missed the part where I was questioned about a case and only realized in retrospect that I was personally being investigated. For nonreporting of NAT (which had no hallmarks of NAT).
Don’t talk to police when they are questioning you if you can help it. It’s not really worth the risk.

do be cordial with them, do let them know when there is something they may want to look into, do be polite and comply with all instructions when getting pulled over, do call 911 to report a crime (but just report. No more). But do not submit to questioning without a lawyer.

 

[Siggy]

6 years of law enforcement experience (3 local and 3 federal) before making the career change to keeping people alive long after their expiration date. Thus, I probably have a bit of a different take than many on this forum.

The rule “never talk to the police” and “talking to the police can never help you” sounds like great advice for people who don’t have the common sense to distinguish when the interaction is because they are a suspect, witness, or victim of crime.

In other words, I’m curious to know if the law enforcement mutes follow their own advice when the cops show up because that patient’s family member kicked THEIR ass for not refilling the oxy, or someone put a gun in THEIR face in the parking deck and demanded the car keys. Or, do you follow your own advice, refuse to talk to the cops, and just go home and put an ice pack on your face?

Keep in mind that many crimes are solved by witnesses willing to come forward and, you know, talk to the police.

So you’re telling me that you can’t distinguish between being a victim and not a suspect?

I guess it helps since police officers will do anything to not arrest a fellow officer, even if it means hiding drunk driving officers.

 

[Siggy]

Probably not, it's the internet.

…talking about the police… and the police are easily triggered.

If I just started blasting away because an acorn fell, I doubt I would be free to walk away from the person I tried to kill.

 

[BoardingDoc]

It really went off the rails when a forum moderator posted a video about not trying to talk your way out of an arrest as if it’s somehow pertinent to interactions with police as part of our jobs

While the video did not discuss the scenario posted by OP (e.g. being asked to state "on the record" what your thoughts about a case were), I still thought it was a relevant reminder that seemingly innocuous conversations with the police may carry legal ramifications.

If this somehow came across as derisive or offensive, that was not my intent. I certainly do not view this information as inflammatory or decidedly off topic, however, I am also not approaching this from the perspective of a former LEO.

 

[MechEDoc]

…talking about the police… and the police are easily triggered.

If I just started blasting away because an acorn fell, I doubt I would be free to walk away from the person I tried to kill.

In my state, the minimum initial training to be a cop is 2 weeks. Yes, they are with a FTO after that, but they are uniform, carrying a firearm, and have arrest powers after 80 hours of training.

 

[Apollyon]

In my state, the minimum initial training to be a cop is 2 weeks. Yes, they are with a FTO after that, but they are uniform, carrying a firearm, and have arrest powers after 80 hours of training.

In NY it's 1095 hours. So, more like paramedic than your EMT hours.

 

[comp1]

The police officer in the CNN video appeared to be quite senior. I think it's more a temperament issue than one related to hours of training.

 

[ShockIndex]

While the video did not discuss the scenario posted by OP (e.g. being asked to state "on the record" what your thoughts about a case were), I still thought it was a relevant reminder that seemingly innocuous conversations with the police may carry legal ramifications.

If this somehow came across as derisive or offensive, that was not my intent. I certainly do not view this information as inflammatory or decidedly off topic, however, I am also not approaching this from the perspective of a former LEO.

Yeah, but that’s not exactly what you posted.You threw that video up there with the comment, “Fantastic lecture on why not to talk to the police…” with no qualification and in the context of other posts about never talking to the police as we conduct or jobs as physicians.

A good rule of thumb is that people responding to complex, nuanced questions with absolutes and anecdotes are generally dispensing bad advice. It’s also telling when forum members start posting the extreme examples of police misconduct such as the acorn shooting as reasons for not talking to police. Seriously, are you people afraid that a police officer is going to start shootings up your ED if startled by a meal tray being dropped? That is about as dumb as thinking that female patients should avoid male EPs because a few of our former colleagues have sexually assaulted female patients.

Another perspective that deserves challenge is this notion that nothing good ever comes from talking to the police. While it is uncommon that our opinions as EPs are make-or-break in an investigation, there are absolutely instances where our information may be important and help our patients. This is especially true with crime prevention, violence mitigation, etc.

So, here is an alternative perspective. Physicians being approached by LE will need to weigh the circumstances of each encounter in deciding how to respond. Some principles that might guide our response to law enforcement are:
1) Do I have the consent from the patient to discuss their care with the police.
2) Would the information that I divulge help my patient
3) Would the information help the public and maybe prevent others from becoming patients
4) Am I obligated to talk to the police by local statues (ie mandatory reporting), court orders, etc.

 

[ShockIndex]

In my state, the minimum initial training to be a cop is 2 weeks. Yes, they are with a FTO after that, but they are uniform, carrying a firearm, and have arrest powers after 80 hours of training.

Do you know the minimum number of intubations an EP in residency must have according to the ACGME?

Just 35. https://www.acgme.org/globalassets/...es/em_key_index_procedure_minimums_103117.pdf

Now, you show me a police officer who was given a badge and a gun after 80 hours of training, and I’ll work on finding you an EP who completed EM residency with just 35 intubations under their belt. I’m not saying that neither exists - I am saying that neither is the norm…and that both minimums are pathetic and an embarrassment.

 

[MechEDoc]

Now, you show me a police officer who was given a badge and a gun after 80 hours of training, and I’ll work on finding you an EP who completed EM residency with just 35 intubations under their belt. I’m not saying that neither exists - I am saying that neither is the norm…and that both minimums are pathetic and an embarrassment.

I could show your a former cop who started with a badge in a gun with two weeks of training. I won't online, but he runs the private security company that covers the ER I work at. He was a a cop for several years before leaving to have his own gig. He became a cop when he was 18 years old.

 

[TooMuchResearch]

Probably not, it's the internet.

No it isn't.
Heh heh.

 

[gruemd]

"Extreme examples of police misconduct" does not mean that these instances are not relatively commonplace. The advent of body cams means that we get to see just how commonplace inappropriate policing is. In fact, here's a video just posted today that highlights some of what we've talked about in this thread.



Inappropriate response at scene for a medical emergency, physician not asking the police to leave the room when examining him, etc. Wish we could see more of the interaction between officers and medical staff, but still. Imagine you have a seizure tonight and cop some felony charges for being postictal and being unfortunate enough that police responded before EMS!

Now, note that this doesn't mean that there is good policing out there. There is. I'm saying this lest someone (else) says this is only "cop bashing". But examples like the above are not new, isolated, or unique. There is a reason for the growing disconnect between the populace and the police, because it is often a spin of the roulette wheel as to the outcome.

 

[comp1]

I watched the whole seizure video. What I think I find really frustrating is that police so often decline to arrest or DAs prosecute assaults on healthcare providers, but clearly the bar was essentially absent for an assault on a police officer. In terms of this particular case, yes, we all know after the fact and because we are healthcare professionals that the man is postictal. I'm not sure we can hold police to that standard and I'm also not sure how that knowledge is particularly helpful. How would it have been different if he was drunk? The officer still had to contain the situation. The man was clearly agitated. What if the officer had just walked out of the room and the guy fell and smashed his or his wife's face? There would also have been a lawsuit. It was lose-lose. You can say the tasing was too much and maybe, but I'm not 100% sure. This man looks older, but he's not appearing weak at all. He actually looks bigger than the officer involved. It seems like the officer STILL had trouble getting control of the situation even after the tasing, which I could see in someone with a really severely agitated delirium. The officer was not carrying around 10 mg of Zyprexa IM. The problem, really, is the arrest requested by the apparently not present supervisor. That, along with the thorough interview of a clearly out of it person, is where things went wrong and why this will be settled out of court for at least a moderate amount. More complete communication between physicians and police might actually have prevented that part. Also, the police department's public response was in poor taste. You apologize that a bad thing happened without admitting fault and certainly not ever accuse a victim of ANYTHING, including "litigating in the court of public opinion." Honestly, just that public response added on $100k to the settlement. If you ever use that phrase, you're going to lose in both public opinion and real court.

 

[Siggy]

It’s also telling when forum members start posting the extreme examples of police misconduct such as the acorn shooting as reasons for not talking to police.

Remember that time a police officer entered the wrong apartment and murdered the lease holder... and it took 3 days before the police decided to actually arrest her? Her union paid for her defense. Do you think that if I went into the wrong apartment and murdered the people inside I'd enjoy an extra 72 hours of freedom?

The fact is that the police operate under a lower standard than the average citizen. The average citizen doesn't have qualified immunity to protect them in civil court from a mistake of law AND if a citizen makes a mistake when dealing with the police, they're likely to end up dead. See any time the police no-knock the wrong house and the innocent victims inside defend themselves from armed individuals unlawfully entering their house in the dead of night. Also how often are we now seeing videos of police officers letting fellow officers go free for drunk driving?

There's a reason "we've investigated ourselves and found no wrong doing" is a cliche.

One final thing. Why is it that when some one is arrested for a major crime, the police come out and make a big scene with press conferences, mug shots, and dash cam footage... but when ever a police officer is arrested for a crime, suddenly we have to respect the officer's privacy and everything is locked down?

Goose meet gander.