Refusing to treat murderers

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.
L

Lilpip

vjohnson
10+ Year Member
Joined
Oct 12, 2011
Messages
18
Reaction score
1
Members don't see this ad.
Alright quick question popped in my head earlier today after watching COPS. Say a man shoots and kills let's say an officer. Man is also shot but survives and is taken to the hospital. Would an ER surgeon be FORCED to treat the man?

Please don't quote the Hippocratic Oath as an answer, if you ask me more "harm" is being done if they leave that operating room alive (just an opinion so pay no heed). I'd gladly go to hell and back to extend the life of any regular Joe, but I don't know if I could sleep knowing I helped a murderer, who best case scenario rots in prison, worst case gets out early just to hurt others again.

So just curious if you can put your foot down on something or if you are forced to be a slave to that Oath. I'm pre-med and this thought scared the hell out of me.
 
Lilpip said:
Alright quick question popped in my head earlier today after watching COPS. Say a man shoots and kills let's say an officer. Man is also shot but survives and is taken to the hospital. Would an ER surgeon be FORCED to treat the man?

Please don't quote the Hippocratic Oath as an answer, if you ask me more "harm" is being done if they leave that operating room alive (just an opinion so pay no heed). I'd gladly go to hell and back to extend the life of any regular Joe, but I don't know if I could sleep knowing I helped a murderer, who best case scenario rots in prison, worst case gets out early just to hurt others again.

So just curious if you can put your foot down on something or if you are forced to be a slave to that Oath. I'm pre-med and this thought scared the hell out of me.
Click to expand...

^pre-med
 
Come on.

You treat anything that is brought to you. You are not the judge, you are the doctor. You are not the jury, you are the doctor. You will save their life so that they can be tried by a jury of their peers and rot in jail. That is your role.

It might be distasteful to you... but are you SURE they are a murderer? Are you committing murder by letting them bleed to death in front of you?

Be a bigger person, do your job, and let the judicial system work...
 
Janders said:
Come on.

You treat anything that is brought to you. You are not the judge, you are the doctor. You are not the jury, you are the doctor. You will save their life so that they can be tried by a jury of their peers and rot in jail. That is your role.

It might be distasteful to you... but are you SURE they are a murderer? Are you committing murder by letting them bleed to death in front of you?

Be a bigger person, do your job, and let the judicial system work...
Click to expand...

^^ This. Also, if you don't want to be a 'slave' to the oath, don't take it. There are a lot of other careers where you can judge people; we treat everyone who comes in the door. There are actually entire areas of Emergency Departments and hospital floors that are jail wards and you treat all patients the same. If you feel like you can't look past a person's crimes, or drug use, or religious beliefs, etc, then don't become a doctor.
 
Lilpip said:
Alright quick question popped in my head earlier today after watching COPS. Say a man shoots and kills let's say an officer. Man is also shot but survives and is taken to the hospital. Would an ER surgeon be FORCED to treat the man?

Please don't quote the Hippocratic Oath as an answer, if you ask me more "harm" is being done if they leave that operating room alive (just an opinion so pay no heed). I'd gladly go to hell and back to extend the life of any regular Joe, but I don't know if I could sleep knowing I helped a murderer, who best case scenario rots in prison, worst case gets out early just to hurt others again.

So just curious if you can put your foot down on something or if you are forced to be a slave to that Oath. I'm pre-med and this thought scared the hell out of me.
Click to expand...

If someone comes through the door dying and you are able to treat him, you must. Period. That's part of the job.

You'd be sued (and you'd lose), plus you'd lose your licence if you let someone die in front of you in the ER because you decided not to help.
 
I'd gladly go to hell and back to extend the life of any regular Joe... unless they hurt a child... or they committed a violent crime... or they did drugs... or they're fat... or they didn't accept Jesus as their Lord and Savior... or they're an illegal alien... or they voted for Obama...

It's an emergency. You resolve the imminent issue at hand and let the rest be sorted out after the facts can be gathered. If saving someones life scares the hell out of you then please stay out of medicine and leave it to people who will worry about sending home the 45 year old mom with an atypical MI...
 
Lets not be too harsh on the OP.. clearly someone who is naive and lacks real life experience and likely has NO experience in the ED.
 
i actually agree with the OP. When I was at a trauma center doing surg/EM, i saw a lot of GSW's and gang member stabbings etc.

if it were up to me, i wouldnt treat the gang bangers who got shot/stabbed. why heal them? so they get better and shoot the guy who shot them? its never ending - let them kill each other. less scum on the earth. waste all these resources on murderers and drug dealers? put them back on the street to continue to ruin the world?
 
Conjuctiva said:
i actually agree with the OP. When I was at a trauma center doing surg/EM, i saw a lot of GSW's and gang member stabbings etc.

if it were up to me, i wouldnt treat the gang bangers who got shot/stabbed. why heal them? so they get better and shoot the guy who shot them? its never ending - let them kill each other. less scum on the earth. waste all these resources on murderers and drug dealers? put them back on the street to continue to ruin the world?
Click to expand...

Repeat after me: You go into medicine to heal. Not to judge.

Someone went into this line of thinking above, but it's a slippery slope. "if it were up to me, i wouldnt treat the fat people/smokers/insert whatever here who had heart attacks. why heal them? so they get better and then just keep smoking and staying fat and wasting health care dollars and taking up hospital beds for people who really need them? its never ending - let them kill themselves. waste all these resources on people who just end up killing themselves?"
 
If it were up to me I wouldn't treat the drug addicts, and Medicaid patients who clearly have made bad life decisions and can't take care of themselves. Why let them live another day to breed more Medicaid patients?

Fortunately it isn't up to me.....
 
Conjuctiva said:
i actually agree with the OP. When I was at a trauma center doing surg/EM, i saw a lot of GSW's and gang member stabbings etc.

if it were up to me, i wouldnt treat the gang bangers who got shot/stabbed. why heal them? so they get better and shoot the guy who shot them? its never ending - let them kill each other. less scum on the earth. waste all these resources on murderers and drug dealers? put them back on the street to continue to ruin the world?
Click to expand...

Well, you can always explain to the jury and the grieving person's mom that you simply assumed they were a gangbanger because he was shot and happened to be black/hispanic/poor-looking/"some-other-appearance-trait". unless you apparently have the omniscience to actually know what happened at a crime scene and are able to determine bystander from gang member.
 
GeneralVeers said:
If it were up to me I wouldn't treat the drug addicts, and Medicaid patients who clearly have made bad life decisions and can't take care of themselves. Why let them live another day to breed more Medicaid patients?

Fortunately it isn't up to me.....
Click to expand...

Most indications are that it is a little more complex than bad life decisions that lead someone to that route in a good chunk of the cases....but yea, F those drug addicts and poor people!
 
Ok...so apparently a minority here. For the record not saying that I wouldn't treat was just asking if I had to. I'll put up with treating them if it means I could continue to treat others. Was just curious if I could refuse without losing everything.
 
In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence.
Click to expand...

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.
Click to expand...

Good reference material on the subject
 
GeneralVeers said:
If it were up to me I wouldn't treat the drug addicts, and Medicaid patients who clearly have made bad life decisions and can't take care of themselves. Why let them live another day to breed more Medicaid patients?

Fortunately it isn't up to me.....
Click to expand...

Rough night?
 
Lilpip said:
Alright quick question popped in my head earlier today after watching COPS. Say a man shoots and kills let's say an officer. Man is also shot but survives and is taken to the hospital. Would an ER surgeon be FORCED to treat the man?

Please don't quote the Hippocratic Oath as an answer, if you ask me more "harm" is being done if they leave that operating room alive (just an opinion so pay no heed). I'd gladly go to hell and back to extend the life of any regular Joe, but I don't know if I could sleep knowing I helped a murderer, who best case scenario rots in prison, worst case gets out early just to hurt others again.

So just curious if you can put your foot down on something or if you are forced to be a slave to that Oath. I'm pre-med and this thought scared the hell out of me.
Click to expand...

Except that when they are in your care they are the "alleged murderer" or "suspected murderer." Our legal system is partially founded upon the idea of being innocent until proven guilty. They are not a murderer until found to be such by a jury of their peers. You are not that jury.
 
Cough cough, EMTALA, cough cough.

Also, the idealistic pre-meds and med students just don't Veers, I fear.
I'm not worried though, because they will once they're done with medical school.
 
not a doc..long time rn..

nice job on all of the non-judgemental attitudes.

beats the last ER where I worked. Famous Catholic hospital; only a couple of the ED docs would write for the morning after pill.

the rest of the group, as a whole, refused.
talk about playing judge and jury.

pt would check in to triage,state that's what she wanted (happened at least once a week, on my shift) wait, then get a 'no' immediately from the ER doc after getting back to a room.

personal judgement mixed with medicine (and nursing) are a horrible combo.

thanks for the vine
 
Hamhock said:
Really? That's pretty messed up...

HH
Click to expand...

Yes. All night long I hear medicaid and "self pay" patients whine about how they can't afford a doctor, can't afford their meds, while they talk on their iPhone, reek of cigarette smoke, and test positive for drugs. After calling the Ambulance Taxi for their non-urgent condition, they demand a free taxi voucher home. At some point if you won't take the slightest financial and medical responsibility for yourself, that is it, and society should be done with you.

So yes, I guess it's messed up.
 
How about this 1. Same concept.

2 people needing kidney transplants. 35 yo guy in prison for life for murdering a family and a 32 yo guy who has a wife n kid n works a decent 60k/yr job. Guy in prison on list above family man.


Whoever says "lottery" or "prison guy cause higher up on list" or ANY reason the prefer the inmate should take a long walk off a short pier.
 
strongboy2005 said:
Ok what if they murdered your child or spouse?
Click to expand...

This sounds like one of those crazy scenarios in an ethics discussion where they throw it out just to try to get people to change their mind. How many times has this realistically happened?
 
Conjuctiva said:
How about this 1. Same concept.

2 people needing kidney transplants. 35 yo guy in prison for life for murdering a family and a 32 yo guy who has a wife n kid n works a decent 60k/yr job. Guy in prison on list above family man.


Whoever says "lottery" or "prison guy cause higher up on list" or ANY reason the prefer the inmate should take a long walk off a short pier.
Click to expand...

If the 35 yo in prison is an illegal-alien getting MediCal, then you know he'll get the kidney for "social justice" and other such nonsense rationalities.
 
chimichanga said:
not a doc..long time rn..

nice job on all of the non-judgemental attitudes.

beats the last ER where I worked. Famous Catholic hospital; only a couple of the ED docs would write for the morning after pill.

the rest of the group, as a whole, refused.
talk about playing judge and jury.

pt would check in to triage,state that's what she wanted (happened at least once a week, on my shift) wait, then get a 'no' immediately from the ER doc after getting back to a room.

personal judgement mixed with medicine (and nursing) are a horrible combo.

thanks for the vine
Click to expand...

I'm trying to think of the name of a famous Catholic hospital; ironically, for all of the Catholic hospitals, none ring a bell for notoriety. Jewish hospitals, though - Mt. Sinai in New York, Long Island Jewish, Cedars-Sinai in LA Even Lutheran in NYC and Methodist in TX come to mind. Loma Linda is 7th Day Adventist. Hell, what's the name of that hospital in Salt Lake - LDS Hospital, maybe?

Even Deaconess in Boston is Deaconess-Beth Israel, so it's not even straight Catholic.

But the Daughters of Charity National Health System operates seemingly anonymously. There are so many St. Francis hospitals, yet they are all separate. Is the Mercy Health System national?

So, I'm stuck.

As for the Catholic and no plan B, my last job was at a Catholic hospital, and, although nominally forbidden, the nuns weren't going through the charts, so there was no functional way to determine if a doc had written for it or not (handwritten Rx almost to the end).
 
Apollyon said:
As for the Catholic and no plan B, my last job was at a Catholic hospital, and, although nominally forbidden, the nuns weren't going through the charts, so there was no functional way to determine if a doc had written for it or not (handwritten Rx almost to the end).
Click to expand...

We have the same issue. Technically no Plan B, but I'm not sure how they'd fine out. Where it's a huge PITA is when we have an ectopic pregnancy and the OB wants methotrexate. There's a whole laundry list of things that have to be done to make sure the pregnancy isn't "viable" so that they are not technically causing an abortion.

I had an OB send her patient to the ER. Had an outpatient ultrasound which showed ectopic, and she sent with specific instructions for methotrexate and discharge. The nurses refused to give it because they had no proof of the ultrasound showing no heartbeat. I had to keep the patient there for 5 hours to repeat labs and ultrasound already done as an outpatient.
 
SoCuteMD said:
Interestingly enough, maybe he won't (but you know he'll get a lifetime of dialysis on our dime).

http://www.mercurynews.com/census/ci_19856536
Click to expand...

We have the same problem here. UMC, our county hospital closed down their outpatient chemotherapy unit which was serving the poor and indigent. The savings of closing it down as about $20 million. Meanwhile we have 200 illegals who get routine dialysis, at a cost of $50 million per year.
 
GeneralVeers said:
We have the same issue. Technically no Plan B, but I'm not sure how they'd fine out. Where it's a huge PITA is when we have an ectopic pregnancy and the OB wants methotrexate. There's a whole laundry list of things that have to be done to make sure the pregnancy isn't "viable" so that they are not technically causing an abortion.

I had an OB send her patient to the ER. Had an outpatient ultrasound which showed ectopic, and she sent with specific instructions for methotrexate and discharge. The nurses refused to give it because they had no proof of the ultrasound showing no heartbeat. I had to keep the patient there for 5 hours to repeat labs and ultrasound already done as an outpatient.
Click to expand...
So what if there was positive cardiac activity? (Provided patient still met criteria for mtx).
 
Apollyon said:
I'm trying to think of the name of a famous Catholic hospital; ironically, for all of the Catholic hospitals,
Click to expand...

CHW in SW USA...

Honestly, in talking to the docs, some said 'I had to sign something" others just seemed to follow suit...

But I got the sense it was a personal decision for most.


My thought is, (try to) know this stuff going in, and decide before you take the job.

Whomever walks in, you should treat, period.

This was a hospital that (the Vatican evidently decided) "lost it's endorsement/affiliation" with the Church d/t an "abortion" being done.

Please, the Pope and his cronies (I am Catholic) have no business poking their nose into medicine.

As far as I can gather from the facts of the case, the doc made a good decision. Regardless, it was his and the patient's decision, period. No one else's business.

And we have several (non chain) pharmacies that won't fill Plan B RXs..

Can you say Moral Majority, and the Extreme Right?

please
 
Last edited:
Seen it.

We had a prison transfer (murderer) with meningoencephalitis. He clearly needed critical care but no one wanted him. This evil man was cuffed to a clinic bed with very little treatment other than fluids for about two weeks before he finally died. No one wanted even to go into his room. He died like an animal really in his own filth.

Left me with a very sick feeling. Not the 'thank god' feeling like some other posters may imagine.

I understand people abuse the system so to speak. However, I try to remember their life has not been my own and that if I were in their shoes I very well may have made the same bad choices. Life is too much for people sometimes. There but for the grace of god, go I.

As far as stopping medicaid patients from breeding, illegals and this other chatter....I might get flack for this but if I ever start to think like this, I think it will be time for me to hang up my hat and look for another profession.

We as a society, and especially doctors have to be better than the individual.

But I'm only a med. student so what do I know anyway?
 
Lilpip said:
Ok...so apparently a minority here. For the record not saying that I wouldn't treat was just asking if I had to. I'll put up with treating them if it means I could continue to treat others. Was just curious if I could refuse without losing everything.
Click to expand...

As an ED physician or any other health care provider in the ED or prehospital setting, you must treat every patient who presents to you unless it would be unsafe to do so (i.e. the patient is in a burning car and FD is not there yet). Failing to do so would be a breach in professional ethics, a potential for civil litigation, professional board discipline, and criminal prosecution.

As stated, you are going into the medical profession, not the legal profession. If you want to be a judge, apply for law school. Our job is to conserve life and let the judicial system run its course. Also, there is presumed innocence in the United States and you should operate on this principle as well. Just because someone came in through the doors an accused child abuser does not mean they did it and it would be quite lofty of you to decide to terminate their life via non-treatment based on a hearsay accusation.

You should think on this before you decide to pursue a medical or health care career. I have had to treat people who I found extremely unsavory, however I have accepted this as part of my job. Will you?
 
GeneralVeers said:
We have the same problem here. UMC, our county hospital closed down their outpatient chemotherapy unit which was serving the poor and indigent. The savings of closing it down as about $20 million. Meanwhile we have 200 illegals who get routine dialysis, at a cost of $50 million per year.
Click to expand...

The illegal alien/dialysis problem is present in a lot of places. There are dialysis centers in SoCal that almost entirely serve illegal immigrants as Medi-Cal will pay. Most have the HTN, DM, ESRD trifecta and are completely uninterested in losing weight or medication compliance. Hundreds of millions go to keeping these people alive a few more days each week.

Meanwhile, Americans with cancer unrelated to lifestyle disease go bankrupt and die.

😉
 
csmmedic said:
The illegal alien/dialysis problem is present in a lot of places. There are dialysis centers in SoCal that almost entirely serve illegal immigrants as Medi-Cal will pay. Most have the HTN, DM, ESRD trifecta and are completely uninterested in losing weight or medication compliance. Hundreds of millions go to keeping these people alive a few more days each week.

Meanwhile, Americans with cancer unrelated to lifestyle disease go bankrupt and die.

😉
Click to expand...

The ethical thing to do would be to stabilize them with a one-time dialysis, then deportation back to Mexico. I've heard the argument: "If they go back to Mexico they won't get dialysis and will die". Possibly true, however by that logic we should fly every poor person in the entire world into the U.S. to get free dialysis.

The unfortunately reality is that healthcare is a scarce resource, and getting scarcer as budgets are cut. Some difficult decisions will eventually be made, voluntarily to prevent the system from crashing, or out of necessity once the system collapses completely.
 
GeneralVeers said:
The ethical thing to do would be to stabilize them with a one-time dialysis, then deportation back to Mexico. I've heard the argument: "If they go back to Mexico they won't get dialysis and will die". Possibly true, however by that logic we should fly every poor person in the entire world into the U.S. to get free dialysis.

The unfortunately reality is that healthcare is a scarce resource, and getting scarcer as budgets are cut. Some difficult decisions will eventually be made, voluntarily to prevent the system from crashing, or out of necessity once the system collapses completely.
Click to expand...

Right. Its basic economics and there isn't enough state-of-the-art medicine to go around to everyone who needs it. Obviously if we opened the borders and the hospitals to everyone in the world we too would no longer have any advanced healthcare.

I agree that once the system collapses, these decisions will have to be made. For now, they will be debated endlessly.
 
Lilpip said:
Ok...so apparently a minority here. For the record not saying that I wouldn't treat was just asking if I had to. I'll put up with treating them if it means I could continue to treat others. Was just curious if I could refuse without losing everything.
Click to expand...

It's not like Medicaid and Medicare, where, if you want the bigger money of Medicare, you have to accept Medicaid - you say you'll "put up with treating them if it means I could continue to treat others". That's not how it rolls. Even if a prisoner came in, unless you went looking, you wouldn't know why they were down ("down" is a term for being "in stir", which means being in prison - remember the film "Stir Crazy" with Richard Pryor and Gene Wilder?). You just treat them, which is 1. the law 2. ethical and moral and humane.
 
Apollyon said:
It's not like Medicaid and Medicare, where, if you want the bigger money of Medicare, you have to accept Medicaid - you say you'll "put up with treating them if it means I could continue to treat others". That's not how it rolls. Even if a prisoner came in, unless you went looking, you wouldn't know why they were down ("down" is a term for being "in stir", which means being in prison - remember the film "Stir Crazy" with Richard Pryor and Gene Wilder?). You just treat them, which is 1. the law 2. ethical and moral and humane.
Click to expand...

Not sure I understand the "That's not how it rolls" bit. Dr. McNinja answered my question with the EMTALA, so that cleared that up. My question was if physicians had any say in the matter. Knowing that you have to treat I can say that to me it would be worth it to be forced into treating even the bad if it meant I still got to help the occasional married father of two every once in a while. That's what I meant by "others".

I also really want to apologize if I stepped on any toes with this whole thing. Been reading the comments and started thinking the whole thread was a bad idea.
 
OK so this kind of offends me because my cousin is currently serving time for murder (even though he had the most re trails in the southern hemisphere showing he didn't do it) and he is the sweetest guy, wouldn't harm a fly......if he was brought to my ER i would treat him. so maybe think before you post such Hippocratic bull****, maybe OP you shouldn't be getting into medicine if that's your thinking. We are doctors not judge,jury and executioner ...we're there to treat those that come in.....did your mother not teach you the saying 'Never judge a book by it's cover!!"
 
Lilpip said:
Not sure I understand the "That's not how it rolls" bit. Dr. McNinja answered my question with the EMTALA, so that cleared that up. My question was if physicians had any say in the matter. Knowing that you have to treat I can say that to me it would be worth it to be forced into treating even the bad if it meant I still got to help the occasional married father of two every once in a while. That's what I meant by "others".

I also really want to apologize if I stepped on any toes with this whole thing. Been reading the comments and started thinking the whole thread was a bad idea.
Click to expand...

Perhaps it was a good idea if you take something from it. Too many people going into medicine are way too sheltered if they think life is that black and white.
 
2 people needing kidney transplants. 35 yo guy in prison for life for murdering a family and a 32 yo guy who has a wife n kid n works a decent 60k/yr job. Guy in prison on list above family man.
Click to expand...

Google a list of people on death row who have later been determined innocent. That list alone is at ~150. Then there are others, like the West Memphis 3, who are almost certainly not guilty, and had there sentences reduced to time served.
 
Mine was a convicted murder (x3). Did a robbery, got trapped. Had one of those long duration hostage situation. He made a decision on how he wanted to end the standoff. He walked out, nobody else did.

Easily convicted.

Appealed. Conviction overturned on some stupid arse technicality.

Retried.

Convicted again.

I got him when he was doing the "I got a kidney stone shuffle" the night before one of his appeals.

I was reminded of all the legal and ethical stuff. I was also reminded that I had a responsibility to do my best so that others could do their best.

He made his court appearance the next morning with no problem.

Old Sparky finally got him.


That is how you treat murderers, rapists etc. You do your best, so somebody else has a chance to do their best.
 
GeneralVeers said:
Yes. All night long I hear medicaid and "self pay" patients whine about how they can't afford a doctor, can't afford their meds, while they talk on their iPhone, reek of cigarette smoke, and test positive for drugs. After calling the Ambulance Taxi for their non-urgent condition, they demand a free taxi voucher home. At some point if you won't take the slightest financial and medical responsibility for yourself, that is it, and society should be done with you.

So yes, I guess it's messed up.
Click to expand...

Despite your frustration with the "Medicaid"/self pay population, I still feel it is sad that you would not treat a drug addict, if you were given the option of refusing (non-EMTALA world).

HH
 
Conjuctiva said:
How about this 1. Same concept.

2 people needing kidney transplants. 35 yo guy in prison for life for murdering a family and a 32 yo guy who has a wife n kid n works a decent 60k/yr job. Guy in prison on list above family man.


Whoever says "lottery" or "prison guy cause higher up on list" or ANY reason the prefer the inmate should take a long walk off a short pier.
Click to expand...

Maybe the 35 y/o in prison was wrongly convicted and maybe the 32 y/o guy is secretly abusing his wife while preparing to commit mass murder once he gets off dialysis. The problem is you can't know everything and acting like a fool who can pronounce judgement is asinine.

Preemptively attacking anyone who disagrees with you says more about how weak you think your argument is than about the people disagreeing.
 
Hamhock said:
Despite your frustration with the "Medicaid"/self pay population, I still feel it is sad that you would not treat a drug addict, if you were given the option of refusing (non-EMTALA world).

HH
Click to expand...

I think we're all responsible for the personal choices that we make. Addiction or not, the decision to use them, and then not get off of them is a personal one. It's inappropriate to make bad personal decisions then go to a hospital and say "please fix up the consequences of my bad decisions, so I can go out and make more bad decisions".

Please see Atlas Shrugged for complete details.
 
One of the groups we see are the chest pain/abdominal pain/the police assaulted me folks who dont want to go to jail.

I find these people the most challenging. Surely the physical stress of fighting with the police can induce MI etc. Surely the police will do what they have to in order to subdue said law breaker (assuming they resist).

I treat everyone with respect (murderers included) but once they start to think im an idiot I lay it on them. If they need admission they get admitted.

one of the most interesting cases I had out of residency was a developmentally delayed guy BIBA after flipping out on the cops and throwing rocks at em.

Dude comes in looking like a meth OD (his appearance and all) but his pupils were small.. Long story short poor guy had a chronic tylenol PM OD and the benadryl made him mad as a hatter. His APAP was over 300. There is more to the story (medical details but i wont bore you).

I treat them all the same.. you have to. I have taken care of the rich, the famous, the poor, the drunk, the homeless. When I walk in the room I treat them all with respect.. how the rest of the visit goes depends on them.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

W
"Emergency rooms refused to treat pregnant women, leaving one to miscarry in a lobby restroom"
Replies
30
Views
4K
CoolDoc1729
CoolDoc1729
D
Patients with capacity refusing treatment/care
2 3
Replies
110
Views
10K
GonnaBeADoc2222
G
Angry Birds
I like treat and street patients
2 3
Replies
131
Views
9K
Mount Asclepius
Mount Asclepius
southerndoc
UnitedHealth CEO Murdered
2 3 4 5 6
Replies
269
Views
18K
Apollyon
A
F
At what point can you refuse to treat a patient in the ED?
Replies
34
Views
5K
RustedFox
RustedFox
Top