Page 3 of 7
Re: If you're in New Mexico, be careful about how you stand.
Posted: Wed Nov 06, 2013 11:42 pm
by mamabearCali
gigag04 wrote:jmra wrote:gigag04 wrote:jmra wrote:jimlongley wrote:jmra wrote:Where was the nurse who should have been acting as the patient advocate who would have stopped the procedure for lack of consent? Where was the risk management specialist for the hospital? Where was the hospital legal counsel who should have been consulted before action was taken?
I see major procedure changes at this hospital along with privileges being yanked from several doctors assuming they manage to get past the medical review board.
They had a warrant, so no lack of consent.
Warrant means nothing to medical personnel. A nurse could have stopped the procedure just as the doctor at the first ER did. I have a family member that runs an OR - showed the story to her and she laughed. You can bring any warrant you want into her OR, without patient consent they aren't touching the patient.
Not sure about other states. Texas can require assistance in executing a search warrant.
Just checked to make sure, not at a private hospital. Also a nurse or doctor practicing in Texas at a public hospital can refuse to comply based on the Hippocratic oath...first, do no harm. This info was confirmed with a local hospitals legal council.
ETA: in short, a warrant can compel a public hospital to comply but the hospital can not compel its employees to comply.
I was wrong...don't even need a warrant. Obv, we're teetering on the cutting edge of case law, so it is an extreme example. That said... The CCP could be applied (though poorly IMO) in a way to avoid the non-compliance of medical personnel.
Art. 2.14. MAY SUMMON AID. Whenever a peace officer meets with resistance in discharging any duty imposed upon him by law, he shall summon a sufficient number of citizens of his county to overcome the resistance; and all persons summoned are bound to obey.
Acts 1965, 59th Leg., vol. 2, p. 317, ch. 722.
Art. 2.15. PERSON REFUSING TO AID. The peace officer who has summoned any person to assist him in performing any duty shall report such person, if he refuse to obey, to the proper district or county attorney, in order that he may be prosecuted for the offense.
As a LEO, I hope you are not okay with forcing people including medical professionals to violate other people against their own conscience and good sense.
Re: If you're in New Mexico, be careful about how you stand.
Posted: Thu Nov 07, 2013 12:00 am
by jmra
mamabearCali wrote:gigag04 wrote:jmra wrote:gigag04 wrote:jmra wrote:jimlongley wrote:jmra wrote:Where was the nurse who should have been acting as the patient advocate who would have stopped the procedure for lack of consent? Where was the risk management specialist for the hospital? Where was the hospital legal counsel who should have been consulted before action was taken?
I see major procedure changes at this hospital along with privileges being yanked from several doctors assuming they manage to get past the medical review board.
They had a warrant, so no lack of consent.
Warrant means nothing to medical personnel. A nurse could have stopped the procedure just as the doctor at the first ER did. I have a family member that runs an OR - showed the story to her and she laughed. You can bring any warrant you want into her OR, without patient consent they aren't touching the patient.
Not sure about other states. Texas can require assistance in executing a search warrant.
Just checked to make sure, not at a private hospital. Also a nurse or doctor practicing in Texas at a public hospital can refuse to comply based on the Hippocratic oath...first, do no harm. This info was confirmed with a local hospitals legal council.
ETA: in short, a warrant can compel a public hospital to comply but the hospital can not compel its employees to comply.
I was wrong...don't even need a warrant. Obv, we're teetering on the cutting edge of case law, so it is an extreme example. That said... The CCP could be applied (though poorly IMO) in a way to avoid the non-compliance of medical personnel.
Art. 2.14. MAY SUMMON AID. Whenever a peace officer meets with resistance in discharging any duty imposed upon him by law, he shall summon a sufficient number of citizens of his county to overcome the resistance; and all persons summoned are bound to obey.
Acts 1965, 59th Leg., vol. 2, p. 317, ch. 722.
Art. 2.15. PERSON REFUSING TO AID. The peace officer who has summoned any person to assist him in performing any duty shall report such person, if he refuse to obey, to the proper district or county attorney, in order that he may be prosecuted for the offense.
As a LEO, I hope you are not okay with forcing people including medical professionals to violate other people against their own conscience and good sense.
I believe he knows that this law would never be applied to the matter discussed in this thread. I believe he submitted it purely for arguments sake and nothing more, at least I hope that is the case.
Re: If you're in New Mexico, be careful about how you stand.
Posted: Thu Nov 07, 2013 12:42 am
by rotor
I don't believe this. The only time they can give you an anesthetic without your consent is in the death chamber. No judge can order a surgical procedure on any human unless that person has been ruled mentally incompetent. This guy had to give the ok for this, probably looking at a future lawsuit. No doctor would do this without a consent.
Re: If you're in New Mexico, be careful about how you stand.
Posted: Thu Nov 07, 2013 3:24 am
by drjoker
airborned wrote:the state of affairs our country is in where it allows such things is unbelievable. i wonder if he played along knowing he was going to get a very lucrative lawsuit out of it? My shame at that level of intrusion is worth about 25 million after taxes.
NO, it is NOT "lucrative" at all. Typically, 50-70% go to the lawyers, another 20% go to "expert wintesses", and 10% go to "miscellaneous expenses". Wait, there's nothing left for you!
I was involved in a personal injury lawsuit and that was how it went. In the end, it was about sticking it to the man and not being "lucrative". In the end, the poor guy would get anywhere from $0 to $2.5 million after taxes and legal fees.
Re: If you're in New Mexico, be careful about how you stand.
Posted: Thu Nov 07, 2013 8:16 am
by gigag04
Read my entire post before reacting to it.
Sheesh. Let's all put the pin back in the grenade.
Re: If you're in New Mexico, be careful about how you stand.
Posted: Thu Nov 07, 2013 8:30 am
by philip964
A second man who made a right turn with out a signal, has filed suit.
http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/201 ... -nm-police" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
A real epidemic of anal drug smuggling in Deming NM.
Re: If you're in New Mexico, be careful about how you stand.
Posted: Thu Nov 07, 2013 9:23 am
by TexasCajun
Wow! Looks like New Mexico is taking the lead in actually doing to the public what government has been accused of for a long time....
Re: If you're in New Mexico, be careful about how you stand.
Posted: Thu Nov 07, 2013 10:07 am
by VMI77
jimlongley wrote:jmra wrote:Where was the nurse who should have been acting as the patient advocate who would have stopped the procedure for lack of consent? Where was the risk management specialist for the hospital? Where was the hospital legal counsel who should have been consulted before action was taken?
I see major procedure changes at this hospital along with privileges being yanked from several doctors assuming they manage to get past the medical review board.
They had a warrant, so no lack of consent.
The first doctor refused saying it was unethical and illegal so they went to another hospital. According to the article the warrant was invalid because it didn't apply in the jurisdiction where the second hospital was located.
Re: If you're in New Mexico, be careful about how you stand.
Posted: Thu Nov 07, 2013 10:22 am
by VMI77
mamabearCali wrote:jmra wrote:
Some of our LEO friends can chime in, but I'm not sure if or how much personal liability a public servant is exposed to while performing their duties.
As far as the dept getting sued, ultimately it's not their money - it's yours. When they run out, they just come take more of yours.
That is what needs to change. If a LEO violates the highest law of our land and deprives a citizen of his natural rights enumerated under our constitution there needs to very little to no shielding for them. It is better that they never again are able to find drugs hidden within someone than to deprive a citizen of his God given right to live free of sexual assault. This crew acted unconscionably, the whole lot from the LEO to the dog handler to the judge to the doctors. We need to have serious consequences for aberrations like this.
The so called war on drugs has contributed more to the shredding of the Constitution than any other single factor. The rise of gangs and gang violence, the near destruction of Mexico (and an excuse to attack 2nd amendment rights here), no knock raids and the killing of innocent people, puppycide, property seizure and confiscation without due process, and aggressive policing in general are all products of the government deciding what people can and cannot ingest into their own bodies. The war on drugs has done far more damage to the country than the drugs themselves could ever do. Funny how we got along for 150 years or so without a "war on drugs."
Re: If you're in New Mexico, be careful about how you stand.
Posted: Thu Nov 07, 2013 10:25 am
by jimlongley
VMI77 wrote:jimlongley wrote:jmra wrote:Where was the nurse who should have been acting as the patient advocate who would have stopped the procedure for lack of consent? Where was the risk management specialist for the hospital? Where was the hospital legal counsel who should have been consulted before action was taken?
I see major procedure changes at this hospital along with privileges being yanked from several doctors assuming they manage to get past the medical review board.
They had a warrant, so no lack of consent.
The first doctor refused saying it was unethical and illegal so they went to another hospital. According to the article the warrant was invalid because it didn't apply in the jurisdiction where the second hospital was located.
Agreed, but they were able to use that (invalid) warrant to bully people into doing their will.
Personally I think each law enforcement and judicial officer involved needs a .30 caliber enema, administered by the medical staff involved.
Re: If you're in New Mexico, be careful about how you stand.
Posted: Thu Nov 07, 2013 11:02 am
by VoiceofReason
gigag04 wrote:jmra wrote:gigag04 wrote:jmra wrote:jimlongley wrote:jmra wrote:Where was the nurse who should have been acting as the patient advocate who would have stopped the procedure for lack of consent? Where was the risk management specialist for the hospital? Where was the hospital legal counsel who should have been consulted before action was taken?
I see major procedure changes at this hospital along with privileges being yanked from several doctors assuming they manage to get past the medical review board.
They had a warrant, so no lack of consent.
Warrant means nothing to medical personnel. A nurse could have stopped the procedure just as the doctor at the first ER did. I have a family member that runs an OR - showed the story to her and she laughed. You can bring any warrant you want into her OR, without patient consent they aren't touching the patient.
Not sure about other states. Texas can require assistance in executing a search warrant.
Just checked to make sure, not at a private hospital. Also a nurse or doctor practicing in Texas at a public hospital can refuse to comply based on the Hippocratic oath...first, do no harm. This info was confirmed with a local hospitals legal council.
ETA: in short, a warrant can compel a public hospital to comply but the hospital can not compel its employees to comply.
I was wrong...don't even need a warrant. Obv, we're teetering on the cutting edge of case law, so it is an extreme example. That said... The CCP could be applied (though poorly IMO) in a way to avoid the non-compliance of medical personnel.
Art. 2.14. MAY SUMMON AID. Whenever a peace officer meets with resistance in discharging any duty imposed upon him by law, he shall summon a sufficient number of citizens of his county to overcome the resistance; and all persons summoned are bound to obey.
Acts 1965, 59th Leg., vol. 2, p. 317, ch. 722.
Art. 2.15. PERSON REFUSING TO AID. The peace officer who has summoned any person to assist him in performing any duty shall report such person, if he refuse to obey, to the proper district or county attorney, in order that he may be prosecuted for the offense.
Let’s see. They would be trying to prosecute me for not assisting a police officer in performing what I believe to be an illegal act? If the “district or county attorney” was stupid enough to prosecute, and the judge didn’t laugh and throw the papers back at him, how do you think this would play to a jury?
Re: If you're in New Mexico, be careful about how you stand.
Posted: Thu Nov 07, 2013 11:23 am
by RoyGBiv
Holy bovine!
I had to look up where Deming was, exactly, so I could be certain to avoid it.
I-10, about half way between Las Cruces and the AZ border. Good news is it's well West of I-25, which is typically about as far West as I go in southern NM.
Re: If you're in New Mexico, be careful about how you stand.
Posted: Thu Nov 07, 2013 4:23 pm
by VoiceofReason
What will it take for the FBI to investigate this scum pit?
Re: If you're in New Mexico, be careful about how you stand.
Posted: Thu Nov 07, 2013 4:42 pm
by VMI77
VoiceofReason wrote:What will it take for the FBI to investigate this scum pit?
A new Attorney General?
Re: If you're in New Mexico, be careful about how you stand.
Posted: Thu Nov 07, 2013 5:44 pm
by mamabearCali
VMI77 wrote:VoiceofReason wrote:What will it take for the FBI to investigate this scum pit?
A new Attorney General?
DING DING DING! We have a winner!