Signing Intoxicated students

[reaper]

Hell, I say let them get a warrant. Just refuse medical blood draw. I can't see to many judges granting a warrant for a 18 yo that had something to drink. If they are, then AZ needs to reevaluate their priorities in the legal system.

[firedoc5]

Hell, I say let them get a warrant. Just refuse medical blood draw. I can't see to many judges granting a warrant for a 18 yo that had something to drink. If they are, then AZ needs to reevaluate their priorities in the legal system.

I know in most states, even the one's with large college towns, still have no tolerance drinking laws for those under 21. So even if they do want to sign off, LEO will probably, or should take them in no matter how "sick" they are and put them in the drunk tank with the professional power drinkers. The next day they can see the judge. That'll sober 'em up pretty quick.

Now to wait for the rebuttal... :violent1:

[tamaith]

i believe in penn. someone who is drunk can not refuse, either ems takes them or police. even both ( ems with police escort.0

[brentoli]

I skipped page two because I am extremely tired, so you probably talked about this already... but...

How do you decide between someone who was drinking, and who is intoxicated?

[stcommodore]

There is a big difference between a BLS unit taking an ETOH patient and not waiting for ALS and a medic letting his B partner doc the call/turf to bls.

[Arizonaffcep]

Hell, I say let them get a warrant. Just refuse medical blood draw. I can't see to many judges granting a warrant for a 18 yo that had something to drink. If they are, then AZ needs to reevaluate their priorities in the legal system.

Only problem is, they CAN'T refuse, if they are ETOH + AND underage. They have lost that ability, because the ability lies only with people who are competent to refuse (ie, not under the influence of drugs or ETOH). Now, to an extent, you can remove the ETOH once the person is 21 yo, because at that point, it is a LEGAL substance to engage in the use. It's similar to what happens to a patient if they have an illegal substance, outside of ETOH (meth, pot, coke, etc.). That's the one thing that people seem to forget, if you have been judged by DR's as medically incompetent to make a decision...then you have less rights than if you were in jail. A LOT less. Of course, it doesn't help that UMC is actually on the PROPERTY of the UofA, so PD CAN come in and bust someone without having been "called" by anyone.

On the flip side...the cops don't usually bust a "lone drinker." What I mean by that is...the guy who has had some ETOH, is underage, and does their own thing. Where PD usually gets them is, driving + MVC, driving + ETOH (usually doesn't come into the hospital), or so drunk they have made themselves WAY TOO OBVIOUS. And of course, the PD that cares most for underage ETOH is UofA PD, not Tucson PD.

[Arizonaffcep]

I skipped page two because I am extremely tired, so you probably talked about this already... but...

How do you decide between someone who was drinking, and who is intoxicated?

In Southern AZ, if they aren't A&O x 4, then they can't refuse. If they are, then ultimately, it comes down to a judgment call by the medic o/s. We don't have any kind of breathalizer thing, so we won't know a level until the hospital draws one. For me personally, if they can carry on a coherent conversation over several minutes, then I'm ok (depending on WHEN they stopped drinking) if they go home, if someone will be there and keep an eye on them. I also have them sign my first care form stating as such. I doubt it reduces my liability, but hopefully it off sets it a little, if the worst happens.

[fiznat]

Only problem is, they CAN'T refuse, if they are ETOH + AND underage. They have lost that ability, because the ability lies only with people who are competent to refuse (ie, not under the influence of drugs or ETOH). Now, to an extent, you can remove the ETOH once the person is 21 yo, because at that point, it is a LEGAL substance to engage in the use.

I think you are still mixing up the responsibilities given to police officers and those given to us as medical providers.

I don't know of any statute, law, or protocol that regards the legality of an ingested substance as a factor to determine a patient's mental status. Unless they are in the custody of a police officer, there is absolutely no difference between an AxO criminal and an AxO law-abiding citizen as far as their ability to make medical decisions. We are not police officers, and the hospital is not a jail.

Again if they are NOT AxO that is a different story, but forcing underage (adult) drinkers who are AxO to go to the hospital is a recipe for disaster in my opinion. Before you do this, I would be absolutely sure of your local laws/statues and have them ready for the inevitable consequences.

[tskstorm]

I think most are missing the title of the thread .... INTOXICATED, I don't normally go around calling people who had 1 beer who are A&O Intoxicated.

[firedoc5]

I think most are missing the title of the thread .... INTOXICATED, I don't normally go around calling people who had 1 beer who are A&O Intoxicated.

So you're talking about "inebriated" pts. Those who present 'past' just being drunk.