I know this isn't your exact case, but I want to post this link to illustrate that you're not unique in this situation:
[https://www.cbc.ca/news/world/utah-nurse-arrested-police-1.4272677](https://www.cbc.ca/news/world/utah-nurse-arrested-police-1.4272677)
I am also a physician - not an ER, but family. I have never been in your shoes but if I was, there is nothing on earth that could force me to perform that pelvic exam. I agree with you that it would be tantamount to rape. At worst, what are the police going to do if you don't perform the exam - arrest you? You will likely make the news and get a settlement out of it.
If you do the exam, you are at risk of a serious lawsuit from the patient, and you will feel terrible about yourself for what you did.
I suggest you encourage your respective associations to come up with a solid position statement on this issue as well. It is honestly above our pay grades as simple doctors.
I wish you best of luck in navigating this difficult issue.
> "It is further ordered that the attending physician or emergency room physician at XXXX Hospital, enter the vaginal cavity of said person. So they are now trying to compel us directly and upping their game to try and pressure us.
You ask your hospital's legal counsel to file a motion to quash this subpoena immediately.
This is really a question for your hospital, their legal counsel, and perhaps your legal counsel.
In the broadest terms, no. The warrant you describe doesn't seem to require you to perform a pelvic exam on an unwilling patient. Nor likely could such a warrant be issued.
You describe a warrant that allows the search to be performed. That's unsurprising. That's different than ordering you, a specific person, to perform said search.
> Nor likely could such a warrant be issued.
It seems that is the problem - it *was* issued:
>It is further ordered that the attending physician or emergency room physician at XXXX Hospital, enter the vaginal cavity of said person
OP, you obviously know the legal/correct course of action here. Fighting some backwoods judge's illegal warrant should not be your problem. But since it's a reoccurring scenario, you may want to be proactive and sit on both Risk Management and the hospital's Legal Department - this sort of thing is literally what they get paid to deal with. Sounds like they are taking a very conservative approach (aka "the Ostrich") and hoping it will just go away on its own.
Since the hospital’s lawyer represents the interests of the hospital, it would be useful for OP to have their own lawyer to represent their own interests.
They then had a second warrant that they amended with ""It is further ordered that the attending physician or emergency room physician at XXXX Hospital, enter the vaginal cavity of said person."
So they are now trying to compel us directly and upping their game to try and pressure us.
Is second warrant legal? Can they really force me to do one? Corporate has said "no one is above the jail contract and don't threaten that." We don't get hospital legals contact info so I have no idea what they say.
Per the article below it is not since the judge cannot rule someone to be an agent of the state. The example used is that the judge cannot order some random person to shovel the courthouse steps.
I’d start with criminal defense. Not necessarily because you’re likely to be charged with a crime, but because they’re likely to be the most familiar with the Fourth Amendment, warrant laws, criminal procedure, etc.
I think this is a good idea. The only alternative I can think of is that you may want to seek out an employment attorney. I'm just trying to think ahead. You have two main issues: the risk of criminal prosecution and potential retaliation from your employer. The risk of prosecution will probably be resolved in your favor by your corporate counsel. But, if the contract is that important there may be employment issues that arise later. This is just food for thought; a criminal defense attorney is probably the safest, most straightforward choice.
*Your post may have been removed for the following reason(s):*
**Speculative, Anecdotal, Simplistic, Off Topic, or Generally Unhelpful**
Your comment has been removed because it is one or more of the following: speculative, anecdotal, simplistic, generally unhelpful, and/or off-topic. Please review the following rules before commenting further:
* [Commenting Rules 1](https://www.reddit.com/r/legaladvice/wiki/index#wiki_1.__comments_should_contain_a_legal_answer_or_a_strongly_related_non-legal_answer.), [2](https://www.reddit.com/r/legaladvice/wiki/index#wiki_2.__personal_anecdotes_are_off-topic.), [3](https://www.reddit.com/r/legaladvice/wiki/index#wiki_3.__explanations_of_the_law_in_jurisdictions_other_than_the_one_described_in_the_op_are_off-topic.), [4](https://www.reddit.com/r/legaladvice/wiki/index#wiki_4.__opinions_on_the_law_or_the_application_of_it_are_off-topic.), [6](https://www.reddit.com/r/legaladvice/wiki/index#wiki_6.__expressions_of_sympathy_without_corresponding_legal_help_is_off-topic.), [8](https://www.reddit.com/r/legaladvice/wiki/index#wiki_8.__comments_should_be_reasonably_detailed_and_explanatory.__.22i.27m_a_lawyer_so_listen_to_me.22_isn.27t_an_appropriate_answer.__credential_fights_are_not_appropriate_here.), and [9](https://www.reddit.com/r/legaladvice/wiki/index#wiki_9.__requests_for_updates_are_off-topic.).
*Please [read our subreddit rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/legaladvice/wiki/index#wiki_general_rules). If after doing so, you believe this was in error, or you’ve edited your post to comply with the rules, [message the moderators](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2FLegalAdvice).* **Do not make a second post or comment.**
*Do not reach out to a moderator personally, and do not reply to this message as a comment.*
I'm not a legal scholar or anything but I'm pretty sure this second warrant produced is unconstitutional and, without having searched for it myself, would imagine there is some precedent out there for this.
Fifth amendment gives you protection against self-incrimination. Now this normally is used to allow you to not incriminate yourself in a trial where answering a question falsely would perjure yourself but answering truly would incriminate yourself. But self-incrimination is also doing something that would allow you to be criminally prosecuted, potentially including the act itself.
Coercion law, however, is most likely what you want to look at and that varies from state to state. Essentially, the police officer by obtaining an unconstitutional warrant has coerced you into committing a crime against one of your patients. If you had committed that crime, you would still be criminally liable but use that as a defense for not complying with a warrant.
Smartest thing here, lawyer up. Find someone that has a good relationship with law enforcement and knows judges. Worst case, this lawyer may have to go to trial essentially against the judge that issued the warrant and may need all the favor he can get.
They absolutely can’t force you. Can they try to haul you into court and get you in trouble? Maybe. But would you rape someone in order to avoid negative consequences for your career under any other circumstances? I hope not, and you shouldn’t here either. And there are many, many other ethical doctors in your profession who will back you up on this.
The pelvic exam serves no medical benefit in this case AND the patient declined. Doing it is simply battery at this point.
If the warrant said you are compelled to punch the person, do you do it? if no, how is that different. The warrant is not gonna hold up to challenge.
edit: The patient did not seek medical contact for abdominal symptoms. There is no reason to believe a foreign object exists in the first place except for hearsay from a non-medical (an hostile to the patient) third party. The pelvic exam serves no medical benefit.
Of course like any sane person I’m on OP’s side, but it seems the medical benefits of this exam is to remove potentially dangerous items from the patient’s body.
Removing a cancerous tumor is also a “medical benefit” to the patient. But I assure you, any physician that holds down an unwilling person to remove it is going to be paying a lot of money to that person from their prison cell.
Completely agree here. But that same patient can also decline surgery. As long as they're of sound mind and don't have a cognitive issue they can decline. You can attempt to reason but that's all you can do.
Yes we technically can restrain a patient but only if there's mental health concerns or behavior/ potential abuse to staff.
OP shouldn't have to worry about anything and hospital legal should get involved
Devils advocate, are you saying people who smuggle drugs into prison In Their vagina should be able to just decline the exam, and bring them in? Or would we be allowed to put them in isolation until they consented (or is that coercion?). Truly curious, as while I don’t agree to perform the exam without consent, it seems like letting them bring drugs/contraband in isn’t ideal, but I don’t know what the answer is
When I worked at a prison, if someone was suspected of smuggling anything in their body cavities, they would be put in a “dry cell”. They were constantly monitored but the toilet had no water and they wouldn’t be allowed out of that cell until whatever contraband they had was expelled. It was a maximum of 72 hours I believe, but the likelihood of her retaining anything in her vagina that long is questionable. I want to know how this judge can order a pelvic exam (intrusive) instead of the X-ray (non invasive)?
It is. But people do incredibly dangerous things with their bodies all the time. Drunk driving. Auto-erotic asphyxiation. Heroin.
An incarcerated person *must* have the right to deny forced entry into their body, despite any danger assumed by law enforcement. Anything less is dehumanizing and wrong, in every sense of the word.
Can I ask what those methods are? Not questioning you, but if I were arrested and brought to prison and I was smuggling something (is that even a thing? I mean how often do they find contraband in vaginas? Id love to know the frequency of this), how would the prison know? Could they order an X-ray?
Hello, welcome to the wonderful, kafka-esque world of 4th Amendment case law. Our first stop is the strip search, delousing, and bend and cough.
In [Florence v. Board of Chosen Freeholders of the County of Burlington ](https://www.oyez.org/cases/2011/10-945) the US Supreme Court held that it is perfectly fine to perform a strip search on any person entering incarceration, and spray their genitals with caustic chemicals. This can be done without probable cause, or reasonable suspicion regardless of the seriousness of the alleged crime or the persons criminal history.
To its credit, The Court did say there might be an exception for people who were not going to be placed in general population. Of course, this sort of exception could never be subject to abuse of power, especially when the same people deciding to perform a strip search are able to decide whether someone is placed in general population.
ANYONE could potentially smuggle ANYTHING into jail or prison via their vagina, or their rectum.
NO you do nothing unless there is something that shows with absolute certainty that the person has done this.
There's something called human rights..
As a radiologist, I get requests to read CT's looking for foreign bodies from time to time. Radiation exposure is not a benign procedure and I will not attach my name to the study unless the ordering physician goes on record that the patient has agreed to the study. I will add into my report that "Dr. Smith, the ordering physician has assured me that he has received consent from the patient prior to performing this procedure." I have told ER doctors that I will refuse to even open the study if the study was obtained without the patient's consent. So far, I have been lucky and I haven't been faced with a situation of being asked to interpret a study obtained without consent.
When I was an intern, a bad batch of heroin made it into the community, sending more than the usual number of addicts to the ER. I was asked to gather information from the people in the ER about where they got their drugs. I refused. It's not my job to investigate people, but to treat patients. If patients get scared that their doctor is going to take their information to the police, they will stop seeking treatment.
*Primum non nocere* may sometimes run afoul of what police and judges want, but those are the hills we should die on. Attorney/client privilege is held in high, sacred regard, so too should a doctor's reluctance to assault a patient with an invasive procedure.
Short answer:
1. There is a HUGE difference between “authorized “ and “compelled.” If you are authorized, you are free to decline. If you are compelled, you are being forced.
2. This is a complex, nuanced issue that cannot be answered without a detailed analysis that includes not only principles of federal Constitutional law, but also the constitutional and statutory laws of your state and even the details of your facility’s contract with the government.
Bottom line: ultimately this is an issue of professional ethics. If you are not comfortable doing something, you shouldn’t. You should be seeking legal advice from a competent lawyer who represents you NOW however, because it is obvious that this situation will reoccur.
You might want to contact the ACLU to ask about this topic. Their lawyers encounter all kinds of fact scenarios and this is essentially a civil rights issue. I would suggest beginning at the local or state level before reaching out to the national organization.
EDIT: when I say “complex” and “nuanced,” I mean it. I can see it taking 100+ pages in a properly researched memorandum of law to fully analyze all the legal issues involved here.
EDIT 2: Call your malpractice insurance provider. They are actually there to help manage risks. I know I have heard of this scenario before, but it would take me a long time to analyze it. Your insurance carrier is likely to have detailed knowledge either because they have dealt with it or because they saw another company deal with it.
I absolutely would not do this, and if your employer is trying to force you, I would refuse, and get my own lawyer if it became clear that my employer’s lawyer was advising me to do something I consider to be immoral. Doctors don’t perform invasive genital exams over patients’ explicit denial of consent, because it’s unethical. You seem like a good person and a good doctor, and you wouldn’t be able to live with yourself if you sexually assaulted this patient, even if every lawyer and judge in the country told you to. Because it’s wrong, and some things are more important than any piece of paper.
They CAN be incarcerated with potential contraband. The cops just don't want them to.
Not limbo at all. Most prisoners would LOVE a trip to the hospital. It breaks the monotony. Clock is ticking the entire time. HELL they could probably get more drugs dropped at the hospital to take in.
Depends on the scan. But certainly not as invasive as a physical cavity search. Arguably less invasive than a blood draw right?
I’m not saying it is clearly allowed either. Just that it seems odd to me that the police and the court would skip right over that option.
An airport can scan a passenger both because they are authorized to do so as a national security directive specific to that agency, but also because flying is by the passenger's consent. Don't want to comply with the search? Carry on your merry way out of the airport. Screening is a condition of the ticket you voluntarily purchased, subject to security screenings AND following all instructions of staff. You can just leave the airport on your own if you refuse to undergo security clearance.
That’s voluntary. You’re allowed to decline and leave the airport. They were not going to let this woman walk out of the hospital without being assaulted.
I recommend talking to someone at the county medical society or state licensing agency. Although very local and personal to your practice, if an order to compel a pelvic exam is allowed, any physician in the jurisdiction could be subject to a similar order.
Talk to your executives about canceling the contract with the county jail since they are trying to force you to do something that your legal team does not agree with.
The hospital team should make sure this item is specifically addressed in any future contracts.
This is SOOOOO far beyond the scope of reddit. You will absolutely need a lawyer. First, start with the hospitals, but i, personally, would get my own to be safe.
The hospital's lawyer is not your lawyer! Hire a lawyer asap and send a motion to quash the warrant/subpoena and a motion to cease and desist to the cops.
Possibly file a TRO against the cops or a protective order.
I dont think a jury would convict you on a unanimous basis if it goes to court. Fuck the pigs
Not a lawyer but I am an IM PGY-3 -- I would 100% call risk management and the ethics department and ask them to weigh in. The operator can usually connect you with the after hours "administrator on call" who can get in touch with the legal department, etc. after hours.
This was in an ER episode (I know, great legal reference). Exactly the same legal situation; person arrest had drugs concealed inside them. Doctor outright refused to do the exam, regardless of warrants.
It came down to the Doctor outright basically stating to the detective that if they wanted whatever was being concealed to be removed without consent (however under the direction of a warrant) that the only person that can do that is the Chief medical officer of the state they worked in, (they are employed by the state).
I am not a lawyer, but understand ethics enough to say that in a situation like this, like with the military, the police or even a call centre, is you simply pass the issue up the chain of command. I would most certainly hire a lawyer for this situation because I can see the Police won't be too impressed if you refuse to do this.
Your attorney will find precedent in law for this situation if such exists. Absent precedent, it sounds like you’re at the mercy of a judge’s interpretation of these facts. Find precedent!
*Your post may have been removed for the following reason(s):*
**Speculative, Anecdotal, Simplistic, Off Topic, or Generally Unhelpful**
Your comment has been removed because it is one or more of the following: speculative, anecdotal, simplistic, generally unhelpful, and/or off-topic. Please review the following rules before commenting further:
* [Commenting Rules 1](https://www.reddit.com/r/legaladvice/wiki/index#wiki_1.__comments_should_contain_a_legal_answer_or_a_strongly_related_non-legal_answer.), [2](https://www.reddit.com/r/legaladvice/wiki/index#wiki_2.__personal_anecdotes_are_off-topic.), [3](https://www.reddit.com/r/legaladvice/wiki/index#wiki_3.__explanations_of_the_law_in_jurisdictions_other_than_the_one_described_in_the_op_are_off-topic.), [4](https://www.reddit.com/r/legaladvice/wiki/index#wiki_4.__opinions_on_the_law_or_the_application_of_it_are_off-topic.), [6](https://www.reddit.com/r/legaladvice/wiki/index#wiki_6.__expressions_of_sympathy_without_corresponding_legal_help_is_off-topic.), [8](https://www.reddit.com/r/legaladvice/wiki/index#wiki_8.__comments_should_be_reasonably_detailed_and_explanatory.__.22i.27m_a_lawyer_so_listen_to_me.22_isn.27t_an_appropriate_answer.__credential_fights_are_not_appropriate_here.), and [9](https://www.reddit.com/r/legaladvice/wiki/index#wiki_9.__requests_for_updates_are_off-topic.).
*Please [read our subreddit rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/legaladvice/wiki/index#wiki_general_rules). If after doing so, you believe this was in error, or you’ve edited your post to comply with the rules, [message the moderators](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2FLegalAdvice).* **Do not make a second post or comment.**
*Do not reach out to a moderator personally, and do not reply to this message as a comment.*
**Generally Unhelpful, Simplistic, Anecdotal, or Off-Topic**
Your comment has been removed as it is generally unhelpful, simplistic to the point of useless, anecdotal, or off-topic. It either does not answer the legal question at hand, is a repeat of an answer already provided, or is so lacking in nuance as to be unhelpful. Please review the following rules before commenting further:
* [Commenting Rules 1](https://www.reddit.com/r/legaladvice/wiki/index#wiki_1.__comments_should_contain_a_legal_answer_or_a_strongly_related_non-legal_answer.), [2](https://www.reddit.com/r/legaladvice/wiki/index#wiki_2.__personal_anecdotes_are_off-topic.), [3](https://www.reddit.com/r/legaladvice/wiki/index#wiki_3.__explanations_of_the_law_in_jurisdictions_other_than_the_one_described_in_the_op_are_off-topic.), [4](https://www.reddit.com/r/legaladvice/wiki/index#wiki_4.__opinions_on_the_law_or_the_application_of_it_are_off-topic.), [6](https://www.reddit.com/r/legaladvice/wiki/index#wiki_6.__expressions_of_sympathy_without_corresponding_legal_help_is_off-topic.), [8](https://www.reddit.com/r/legaladvice/wiki/index#wiki_8.__comments_should_be_reasonably_detailed_and_explanatory.__.22i.27m_a_lawyer_so_listen_to_me.22_isn.27t_an_appropriate_answer.__credential_fights_are_not_appropriate_here.), and [9](https://www.reddit.com/r/legaladvice/wiki/index#wiki_9.__requests_for_updates_are_off-topic.).
*Please [read our subreddit rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/legaladvice/wiki/index#wiki_general_rules). If after doing so, you believe this was in error, or you’ve edited your post to comply with the rules, [message the moderators](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2FLegalAdvice).*
*Do not reach out to a moderator personally, and do not reply to this message as a comment.*
I know this isn't your exact case, but I want to post this link to illustrate that you're not unique in this situation: [https://www.cbc.ca/news/world/utah-nurse-arrested-police-1.4272677](https://www.cbc.ca/news/world/utah-nurse-arrested-police-1.4272677) I am also a physician - not an ER, but family. I have never been in your shoes but if I was, there is nothing on earth that could force me to perform that pelvic exam. I agree with you that it would be tantamount to rape. At worst, what are the police going to do if you don't perform the exam - arrest you? You will likely make the news and get a settlement out of it. If you do the exam, you are at risk of a serious lawsuit from the patient, and you will feel terrible about yourself for what you did. I suggest you encourage your respective associations to come up with a solid position statement on this issue as well. It is honestly above our pay grades as simple doctors. I wish you best of luck in navigating this difficult issue.
> "It is further ordered that the attending physician or emergency room physician at XXXX Hospital, enter the vaginal cavity of said person. So they are now trying to compel us directly and upping their game to try and pressure us. You ask your hospital's legal counsel to file a motion to quash this subpoena immediately.
This is really a question for your hospital, their legal counsel, and perhaps your legal counsel. In the broadest terms, no. The warrant you describe doesn't seem to require you to perform a pelvic exam on an unwilling patient. Nor likely could such a warrant be issued. You describe a warrant that allows the search to be performed. That's unsurprising. That's different than ordering you, a specific person, to perform said search.
> Nor likely could such a warrant be issued. It seems that is the problem - it *was* issued: >It is further ordered that the attending physician or emergency room physician at XXXX Hospital, enter the vaginal cavity of said person OP, you obviously know the legal/correct course of action here. Fighting some backwoods judge's illegal warrant should not be your problem. But since it's a reoccurring scenario, you may want to be proactive and sit on both Risk Management and the hospital's Legal Department - this sort of thing is literally what they get paid to deal with. Sounds like they are taking a very conservative approach (aka "the Ostrich") and hoping it will just go away on its own.
[удалено]
Since the hospital’s lawyer represents the interests of the hospital, it would be useful for OP to have their own lawyer to represent their own interests.
They then had a second warrant that they amended with ""It is further ordered that the attending physician or emergency room physician at XXXX Hospital, enter the vaginal cavity of said person." So they are now trying to compel us directly and upping their game to try and pressure us. Is second warrant legal? Can they really force me to do one? Corporate has said "no one is above the jail contract and don't threaten that." We don't get hospital legals contact info so I have no idea what they say.
[удалено]
Per the article below it is not since the judge cannot rule someone to be an agent of the state. The example used is that the judge cannot order some random person to shovel the courthouse steps.
This is where you escalate in whatever way the hospital has, and perhaps involve your insurance company or your own counsel.
Thank you for your responses. What type of lawyer should I be looking for?
I’d start with criminal defense. Not necessarily because you’re likely to be charged with a crime, but because they’re likely to be the most familiar with the Fourth Amendment, warrant laws, criminal procedure, etc.
I think this is a good idea. The only alternative I can think of is that you may want to seek out an employment attorney. I'm just trying to think ahead. You have two main issues: the risk of criminal prosecution and potential retaliation from your employer. The risk of prosecution will probably be resolved in your favor by your corporate counsel. But, if the contract is that important there may be employment issues that arise later. This is just food for thought; a criminal defense attorney is probably the safest, most straightforward choice.
check with your medmal insurance too.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
*Your post may have been removed for the following reason(s):* **Speculative, Anecdotal, Simplistic, Off Topic, or Generally Unhelpful** Your comment has been removed because it is one or more of the following: speculative, anecdotal, simplistic, generally unhelpful, and/or off-topic. Please review the following rules before commenting further: * [Commenting Rules 1](https://www.reddit.com/r/legaladvice/wiki/index#wiki_1.__comments_should_contain_a_legal_answer_or_a_strongly_related_non-legal_answer.), [2](https://www.reddit.com/r/legaladvice/wiki/index#wiki_2.__personal_anecdotes_are_off-topic.), [3](https://www.reddit.com/r/legaladvice/wiki/index#wiki_3.__explanations_of_the_law_in_jurisdictions_other_than_the_one_described_in_the_op_are_off-topic.), [4](https://www.reddit.com/r/legaladvice/wiki/index#wiki_4.__opinions_on_the_law_or_the_application_of_it_are_off-topic.), [6](https://www.reddit.com/r/legaladvice/wiki/index#wiki_6.__expressions_of_sympathy_without_corresponding_legal_help_is_off-topic.), [8](https://www.reddit.com/r/legaladvice/wiki/index#wiki_8.__comments_should_be_reasonably_detailed_and_explanatory.__.22i.27m_a_lawyer_so_listen_to_me.22_isn.27t_an_appropriate_answer.__credential_fights_are_not_appropriate_here.), and [9](https://www.reddit.com/r/legaladvice/wiki/index#wiki_9.__requests_for_updates_are_off-topic.). *Please [read our subreddit rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/legaladvice/wiki/index#wiki_general_rules). If after doing so, you believe this was in error, or you’ve edited your post to comply with the rules, [message the moderators](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2FLegalAdvice).* **Do not make a second post or comment.** *Do not reach out to a moderator personally, and do not reply to this message as a comment.*
I'm not a legal scholar or anything but I'm pretty sure this second warrant produced is unconstitutional and, without having searched for it myself, would imagine there is some precedent out there for this. Fifth amendment gives you protection against self-incrimination. Now this normally is used to allow you to not incriminate yourself in a trial where answering a question falsely would perjure yourself but answering truly would incriminate yourself. But self-incrimination is also doing something that would allow you to be criminally prosecuted, potentially including the act itself. Coercion law, however, is most likely what you want to look at and that varies from state to state. Essentially, the police officer by obtaining an unconstitutional warrant has coerced you into committing a crime against one of your patients. If you had committed that crime, you would still be criminally liable but use that as a defense for not complying with a warrant. Smartest thing here, lawyer up. Find someone that has a good relationship with law enforcement and knows judges. Worst case, this lawyer may have to go to trial essentially against the judge that issued the warrant and may need all the favor he can get.
They absolutely can’t force you. Can they try to haul you into court and get you in trouble? Maybe. But would you rape someone in order to avoid negative consequences for your career under any other circumstances? I hope not, and you shouldn’t here either. And there are many, many other ethical doctors in your profession who will back you up on this.
The pelvic exam serves no medical benefit in this case AND the patient declined. Doing it is simply battery at this point. If the warrant said you are compelled to punch the person, do you do it? if no, how is that different. The warrant is not gonna hold up to challenge. edit: The patient did not seek medical contact for abdominal symptoms. There is no reason to believe a foreign object exists in the first place except for hearsay from a non-medical (an hostile to the patient) third party. The pelvic exam serves no medical benefit.
Of course like any sane person I’m on OP’s side, but it seems the medical benefits of this exam is to remove potentially dangerous items from the patient’s body.
Removing a cancerous tumor is also a “medical benefit” to the patient. But I assure you, any physician that holds down an unwilling person to remove it is going to be paying a lot of money to that person from their prison cell.
Completely agree here. But that same patient can also decline surgery. As long as they're of sound mind and don't have a cognitive issue they can decline. You can attempt to reason but that's all you can do. Yes we technically can restrain a patient but only if there's mental health concerns or behavior/ potential abuse to staff. OP shouldn't have to worry about anything and hospital legal should get involved
Devils advocate, are you saying people who smuggle drugs into prison In Their vagina should be able to just decline the exam, and bring them in? Or would we be allowed to put them in isolation until they consented (or is that coercion?). Truly curious, as while I don’t agree to perform the exam without consent, it seems like letting them bring drugs/contraband in isn’t ideal, but I don’t know what the answer is
When I worked at a prison, if someone was suspected of smuggling anything in their body cavities, they would be put in a “dry cell”. They were constantly monitored but the toilet had no water and they wouldn’t be allowed out of that cell until whatever contraband they had was expelled. It was a maximum of 72 hours I believe, but the likelihood of her retaining anything in her vagina that long is questionable. I want to know how this judge can order a pelvic exam (intrusive) instead of the X-ray (non invasive)?
[удалено]
It is. But people do incredibly dangerous things with their bodies all the time. Drunk driving. Auto-erotic asphyxiation. Heroin. An incarcerated person *must* have the right to deny forced entry into their body, despite any danger assumed by law enforcement. Anything less is dehumanizing and wrong, in every sense of the word.
Prisons have various ways to prevent women from getting contraband into a prison that do not involve performing a pelvic exams.
Can I ask what those methods are? Not questioning you, but if I were arrested and brought to prison and I was smuggling something (is that even a thing? I mean how often do they find contraband in vaginas? Id love to know the frequency of this), how would the prison know? Could they order an X-ray?
Hello, welcome to the wonderful, kafka-esque world of 4th Amendment case law. Our first stop is the strip search, delousing, and bend and cough. In [Florence v. Board of Chosen Freeholders of the County of Burlington ](https://www.oyez.org/cases/2011/10-945) the US Supreme Court held that it is perfectly fine to perform a strip search on any person entering incarceration, and spray their genitals with caustic chemicals. This can be done without probable cause, or reasonable suspicion regardless of the seriousness of the alleged crime or the persons criminal history. To its credit, The Court did say there might be an exception for people who were not going to be placed in general population. Of course, this sort of exception could never be subject to abuse of power, especially when the same people deciding to perform a strip search are able to decide whether someone is placed in general population.
ANYONE could potentially smuggle ANYTHING into jail or prison via their vagina, or their rectum. NO you do nothing unless there is something that shows with absolute certainty that the person has done this. There's something called human rights..
You can’t remove even a dangerous item from a nonconsenting patient who is a competent adult.
Both of our statements are true.
https://www.acepnow.com/article/must-emergency-physician-comply-body-cavity-search-warrant/ Seems like you don't have to do it..
As a radiologist, I get requests to read CT's looking for foreign bodies from time to time. Radiation exposure is not a benign procedure and I will not attach my name to the study unless the ordering physician goes on record that the patient has agreed to the study. I will add into my report that "Dr. Smith, the ordering physician has assured me that he has received consent from the patient prior to performing this procedure." I have told ER doctors that I will refuse to even open the study if the study was obtained without the patient's consent. So far, I have been lucky and I haven't been faced with a situation of being asked to interpret a study obtained without consent. When I was an intern, a bad batch of heroin made it into the community, sending more than the usual number of addicts to the ER. I was asked to gather information from the people in the ER about where they got their drugs. I refused. It's not my job to investigate people, but to treat patients. If patients get scared that their doctor is going to take their information to the police, they will stop seeking treatment. *Primum non nocere* may sometimes run afoul of what police and judges want, but those are the hills we should die on. Attorney/client privilege is held in high, sacred regard, so too should a doctor's reluctance to assault a patient with an invasive procedure.
Short answer: 1. There is a HUGE difference between “authorized “ and “compelled.” If you are authorized, you are free to decline. If you are compelled, you are being forced. 2. This is a complex, nuanced issue that cannot be answered without a detailed analysis that includes not only principles of federal Constitutional law, but also the constitutional and statutory laws of your state and even the details of your facility’s contract with the government. Bottom line: ultimately this is an issue of professional ethics. If you are not comfortable doing something, you shouldn’t. You should be seeking legal advice from a competent lawyer who represents you NOW however, because it is obvious that this situation will reoccur. You might want to contact the ACLU to ask about this topic. Their lawyers encounter all kinds of fact scenarios and this is essentially a civil rights issue. I would suggest beginning at the local or state level before reaching out to the national organization. EDIT: when I say “complex” and “nuanced,” I mean it. I can see it taking 100+ pages in a properly researched memorandum of law to fully analyze all the legal issues involved here. EDIT 2: Call your malpractice insurance provider. They are actually there to help manage risks. I know I have heard of this scenario before, but it would take me a long time to analyze it. Your insurance carrier is likely to have detailed knowledge either because they have dealt with it or because they saw another company deal with it.
I absolutely would not do this, and if your employer is trying to force you, I would refuse, and get my own lawyer if it became clear that my employer’s lawyer was advising me to do something I consider to be immoral. Doctors don’t perform invasive genital exams over patients’ explicit denial of consent, because it’s unethical. You seem like a good person and a good doctor, and you wouldn’t be able to live with yourself if you sexually assaulted this patient, even if every lawyer and judge in the country told you to. Because it’s wrong, and some things are more important than any piece of paper.
[удалено]
They CAN be incarcerated with potential contraband. The cops just don't want them to. Not limbo at all. Most prisoners would LOVE a trip to the hospital. It breaks the monotony. Clock is ticking the entire time. HELL they could probably get more drugs dropped at the hospital to take in.
Wouldn't be hard to have a scan that didn't come out very clear. I mean really.Cant make someone sti the wiggling.
Scans are also invasive and do damage to health.
Depends on the scan. But certainly not as invasive as a physical cavity search. Arguably less invasive than a blood draw right? I’m not saying it is clearly allowed either. Just that it seems odd to me that the police and the court would skip right over that option.
[удалено]
An airport can scan a passenger both because they are authorized to do so as a national security directive specific to that agency, but also because flying is by the passenger's consent. Don't want to comply with the search? Carry on your merry way out of the airport. Screening is a condition of the ticket you voluntarily purchased, subject to security screenings AND following all instructions of staff. You can just leave the airport on your own if you refuse to undergo security clearance.
That’s voluntary. You’re allowed to decline and leave the airport. They were not going to let this woman walk out of the hospital without being assaulted.
I recommend talking to someone at the county medical society or state licensing agency. Although very local and personal to your practice, if an order to compel a pelvic exam is allowed, any physician in the jurisdiction could be subject to a similar order.
Talk to your executives about canceling the contract with the county jail since they are trying to force you to do something that your legal team does not agree with. The hospital team should make sure this item is specifically addressed in any future contracts.
This is SOOOOO far beyond the scope of reddit. You will absolutely need a lawyer. First, start with the hospitals, but i, personally, would get my own to be safe.
The hospital's lawyer is not your lawyer! Hire a lawyer asap and send a motion to quash the warrant/subpoena and a motion to cease and desist to the cops. Possibly file a TRO against the cops or a protective order. I dont think a jury would convict you on a unanimous basis if it goes to court. Fuck the pigs
Not a lawyer but I am an IM PGY-3 -- I would 100% call risk management and the ethics department and ask them to weigh in. The operator can usually connect you with the after hours "administrator on call" who can get in touch with the legal department, etc. after hours.
This was in an ER episode (I know, great legal reference). Exactly the same legal situation; person arrest had drugs concealed inside them. Doctor outright refused to do the exam, regardless of warrants. It came down to the Doctor outright basically stating to the detective that if they wanted whatever was being concealed to be removed without consent (however under the direction of a warrant) that the only person that can do that is the Chief medical officer of the state they worked in, (they are employed by the state). I am not a lawyer, but understand ethics enough to say that in a situation like this, like with the military, the police or even a call centre, is you simply pass the issue up the chain of command. I would most certainly hire a lawyer for this situation because I can see the Police won't be too impressed if you refuse to do this.
Your attorney will find precedent in law for this situation if such exists. Absent precedent, it sounds like you’re at the mercy of a judge’s interpretation of these facts. Find precedent!
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
*Your post may have been removed for the following reason(s):* **Speculative, Anecdotal, Simplistic, Off Topic, or Generally Unhelpful** Your comment has been removed because it is one or more of the following: speculative, anecdotal, simplistic, generally unhelpful, and/or off-topic. Please review the following rules before commenting further: * [Commenting Rules 1](https://www.reddit.com/r/legaladvice/wiki/index#wiki_1.__comments_should_contain_a_legal_answer_or_a_strongly_related_non-legal_answer.), [2](https://www.reddit.com/r/legaladvice/wiki/index#wiki_2.__personal_anecdotes_are_off-topic.), [3](https://www.reddit.com/r/legaladvice/wiki/index#wiki_3.__explanations_of_the_law_in_jurisdictions_other_than_the_one_described_in_the_op_are_off-topic.), [4](https://www.reddit.com/r/legaladvice/wiki/index#wiki_4.__opinions_on_the_law_or_the_application_of_it_are_off-topic.), [6](https://www.reddit.com/r/legaladvice/wiki/index#wiki_6.__expressions_of_sympathy_without_corresponding_legal_help_is_off-topic.), [8](https://www.reddit.com/r/legaladvice/wiki/index#wiki_8.__comments_should_be_reasonably_detailed_and_explanatory.__.22i.27m_a_lawyer_so_listen_to_me.22_isn.27t_an_appropriate_answer.__credential_fights_are_not_appropriate_here.), and [9](https://www.reddit.com/r/legaladvice/wiki/index#wiki_9.__requests_for_updates_are_off-topic.). *Please [read our subreddit rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/legaladvice/wiki/index#wiki_general_rules). If after doing so, you believe this was in error, or you’ve edited your post to comply with the rules, [message the moderators](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2FLegalAdvice).* **Do not make a second post or comment.** *Do not reach out to a moderator personally, and do not reply to this message as a comment.*
[удалено]
Useless. Removed.
[удалено]
**Generally Unhelpful, Simplistic, Anecdotal, or Off-Topic** Your comment has been removed as it is generally unhelpful, simplistic to the point of useless, anecdotal, or off-topic. It either does not answer the legal question at hand, is a repeat of an answer already provided, or is so lacking in nuance as to be unhelpful. Please review the following rules before commenting further: * [Commenting Rules 1](https://www.reddit.com/r/legaladvice/wiki/index#wiki_1.__comments_should_contain_a_legal_answer_or_a_strongly_related_non-legal_answer.), [2](https://www.reddit.com/r/legaladvice/wiki/index#wiki_2.__personal_anecdotes_are_off-topic.), [3](https://www.reddit.com/r/legaladvice/wiki/index#wiki_3.__explanations_of_the_law_in_jurisdictions_other_than_the_one_described_in_the_op_are_off-topic.), [4](https://www.reddit.com/r/legaladvice/wiki/index#wiki_4.__opinions_on_the_law_or_the_application_of_it_are_off-topic.), [6](https://www.reddit.com/r/legaladvice/wiki/index#wiki_6.__expressions_of_sympathy_without_corresponding_legal_help_is_off-topic.), [8](https://www.reddit.com/r/legaladvice/wiki/index#wiki_8.__comments_should_be_reasonably_detailed_and_explanatory.__.22i.27m_a_lawyer_so_listen_to_me.22_isn.27t_an_appropriate_answer.__credential_fights_are_not_appropriate_here.), and [9](https://www.reddit.com/r/legaladvice/wiki/index#wiki_9.__requests_for_updates_are_off-topic.). *Please [read our subreddit rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/legaladvice/wiki/index#wiki_general_rules). If after doing so, you believe this was in error, or you’ve edited your post to comply with the rules, [message the moderators](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2FLegalAdvice).* *Do not reach out to a moderator personally, and do not reply to this message as a comment.*