My read on this is that we should apply the IRMER rules - medical
exposure to ionising radiation must be justified.
As clinicians, we probably should irradiate and observe/retrieve if the
punter admits to stuffing or swallowing. If not, I suspect a good lawyer
could make a case for battery against the doctor.
If the police want a picture before they arrest or charge someone, then
that's a forensic matter and outside the ED's remit.
The PC is right - the law relating to imaging/investigation against
consent has changed - take for example the unconscious patient procedure
adopted for alcohol testing after RTCs. This has to be correctly
documented by an appropriate doctor, ie an FME.
Sorry constable, not my department...
All the best
Matt Heywood
SpR Norwich
Duncan Peacock wrote:
>
> Your thoughts please
>
> Police bring arrested person in to A+E and state they think he may
> have swallowed some drugs as was being arrested. Would you x-ray him
> please.
>
>
> Do you:
>
> 1. assess "patient" and fill in the form
>
> 2. ask "patient" if they have taken anything, explain the risks if
> they have, assess for evidence toxicity. If they deny taking drugs
> document same, and discharge with no x-ray. "come back if you need help"
>
> Usually do (2) but Police now state law has changed doc, you have to
> x-ray them. Surely a negative x-ray means nothing.
>
> Merry Christmas
>
> Duncan
>
>
>
|