Today, the Nevada Supreme Court made a horrible ruling saying that patient talking to a paramedic/Emergency Medical Technician is not privileged communication and the ruling may keep patients to be quiet about their medical condition and end up dying because of this horrible ruling.
From the Las Vegas Sun: An injured person in an ambulance might not want to tell his or her legal troubles to a paramedic.
The Nevada Supreme Court ruled that such conversations are not privileged, as they would be between a doctor and a patient.
David M. Rogers had suffered a cut to his thigh while riding a mountain bike. He was driving himself to a hospital when authorities say he caused a seven-car accident in Carson City that seriously injured at least one person.
In the ambulance, Rogers told paramedic Jeff Friedlander he had smoked marijuana, but asked him not to tell police. Friedlander relayed the information to a Nevada Highway Patrol trooper.
But here is where the Supreme Court is wrong: In his appeal, Rogers claimed the statement made to the paramedic was protected as a doctor-patient conversation. But the court said the privilege between a doctor and a patient is to encourage candor to allow the best possible medical care.
There was no doctor present at the scene and Friedlander wasn't acting under the supervision or direction of a doctor. Instead, he was an independent emergency medical technician. http://www.lasvegassun.com/news/2011/jun/02/court-impaired-mans-conversation-emt-after-crash-n/
Every EMT/paramedic works under the supervision of a doctor. Each ambulance service must have a doctor as it's medical director. There are no independent EMT's.
As far as the case, this ruling is just plain wrong. It puts the EMT/paramedic in the position of health care provider and a cop. It may also result in a patient not giving important information to an EMT because the fear that the EMT may go to the cops and the person may go to jail because of the conversation.
This is a terrible decision by the Nevada Supreme Court and it may cause a person to be quiet about their medical condition and the end result may be that the person may die.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Wow, some old examples there. But it's possible to do liberal subtext, without beating someone over the head with it. Conservatives simply don't DO subtext. Stories or shows with a conservative point of view are a subtle as an anvil. Think of the FOX News "Half Hour News Hour," or "An American Carol," or those dreadful "Left Behind" movies. They club you over the head with it.
ReplyDeleteI'd say though that prior to "All in the Family," conservatives had a stranglehold on media. "Leave it to Beaver" and "Ozzie and Harriet" showed an idealized world that didn't exist.