We had a bit of a soap opera at work the other day. Medic tested pos for marijuana. Claims he had a prescription for medicinal purposes. Supervisor said no way and suspended him from running calls indefinitely. Review board has to make a decision. In the meantime he flipped out and threw a airway bag, threw the cleaning caddy and swore at the administrators but not before telling dispatch to f-off when they asked him to take a wheelchair van over to pick up a dialysis pt. Got into an argument with me when I told him to calm down and quit making a scene. Called me everything but a white man and said i was a spawn of the devil. I told him he shouldnt be out on calls where we have to depend on each other if he is impaired. I dont want somebody I have to trust with my life coming to work higher than a georgia pine. That has happened before and I didnt like it nor did anybody else on our crew. Thats not how EMS is supposed to wok. So here is my question. Did I have a right to say he shouldnt use the crap if hes going to work in EMS? I'm just looking out for everybody. Dont want anybody gettin hurt or killed. And can they fire him even though he has a prescription for the stuff?
Clueless Medic flips out
- Thread starter 350chevy
- Start date
SOOOOO, Dispatch gave him a call which involved a live human being "after" this?
Are ya sure ya turned in evvvverybody who needed a wake up call? I'm dyin here...lol
Bieber
Forum Crew Member
- 93
- 0
- 0
Don't know what Illinois' laws are regarding that (though I did live there for several years, but that was before I got into EMS), but I think most states and services have laws and regulations against operating an ambulance while you're on mind altering substances--prescription medications or otherwise.
+1. I feel like Medical Mary-juana is in itself even a grey area for medics...if you have a condition that requires you to use a pain killer/mind altering drug, should you be working in EMS?
The right to express your opinion is protected by some document or another
Even if they can't after his display I am sure they could use one of those reasons.
- 11,032
- 1,479
- 113
The right to express your opinion is protected by some document or another
Seems to me that document only protects your rights from government interference or restriction, not a private employer or entity.
i thought he meant from a moral standpoint
- 11,032
- 1,479
- 113
Possibly, but I just wanted to make sure that he could still face some problems from his employer if he speaks out in a manner they don't approve of.
firetender
Community Leader Emeritus
- 2,552
- 12
- 38
Such things are best handled quietly. Apparently the person in question chose not to be very quiet. That puts a bull's eye on his butt, it isn't your fault and he deserves what he gets. Logically, being stoned on the job is not desirable, and you have the right, if you suspect your partner is impaired, to pull the plug and that means going to an even higher authority (so to speak!).
Medical marijuana laws are not Federal and the Feds say the stuff is illegal. Violating Federal Law trumps any local ruling. The person in question has zero argument in his favor, he got caught and must pay the consequences.
If you believe your partner is impaired on a call you have more than a right to bring it to someone's attention; for the sake of patient care, it is your responsibility.
Medical marijuana laws are not Federal and the Feds say the stuff is illegal. Violating Federal Law trumps any local ruling. The person in question has zero argument in his favor, he got caught and must pay the consequences.
If you believe your partner is impaired on a call you have more than a right to bring it to someone's attention; for the sake of patient care, it is your responsibility.
JPINFV
Gadfly
- 12,681
- 197
- 63
True, medical marijuana laws are federal, however the local police are under no obligation to enforce federal law and I think the FBI has more important fish to fry than people simply using marijuana for any reason at all. "Does marijuana have a medicinal use?" is a valid question, and is essentially the difference between schedule 1 and schedule 2 (note: cocaine is a schedule 2 drug), and should not be up to law enforcement or the legislature. If the difference between schedule 1 and schedule 2 is "Does this drug have a medicinal use?" then the difference between schedule 1 and schedule 2 should be up to physicians and pharmacists, not legislatures or law enforcement officers at any level.
I think there's a slight difference between being impaired (and the bar for impaired in this sense is extremely low and a lot lower than the legal limit to drive) and just testing positive. How many people will test positive for alcohol in their urine while working? Mind you, alcohol can be found in the urine long after it's dropped below any remotely altering levels in the blood. Should people be fired if their urine tests positive for alcohol while on duty, even if they aren't impaired?
jjesusfreak01
Forum Deputy Chief
- 1,344
- 2
- 36
This is important. For marijuana, the high lasts only a few hours, but can be detected by (urine) drug tests for up to a month. So, while I would have problems with an EMS worker on a truck while high, there shouldn't be any problem with them working the next day. This is essentially punishing people for their lifestyle choices outside of work, especially if they are in a state where medical marijuana is legal. The commerce clause clearly doesn't apply in any case where marijuana is grown in state (despite what our scotus judges may want to believe), so this is purely a states rights issue. There are also a number of jobs I wouldn't mind them doing while taking the marijuana, but working as an EMT in the field isn't one of them.
AlphaButch
Forum Lieutenant
- 229
- 0
- 0
Medical Marijuana is illegal in Illinois (720 ILCS 550/5), unless you are a part of a research study. Having a prescription does not offer protection from an employer's drug policy. Medical Marijuana does not have the same status as other prescription drugs (because the drug remains illegal under federal law).
(other cases involving employment termination due to medical marijuana IN states where it IS legal) cite p.
Roe v. Teletech Customer Care Management (2009)
Johnson v. Columbia Falls Aluminum Company LLC (2009)
Ross v. Raginwire Telecomm., Inc. (2008)
In addition, under the federal Drug Free Workplace Act of 1998, federal contractors and recipients of federal grants must prohibit the use of marijuana as a condition of participation.
(other cases involving employment termination due to medical marijuana IN states where it IS legal) cite p.
Roe v. Teletech Customer Care Management (2009)
Johnson v. Columbia Falls Aluminum Company LLC (2009)
Ross v. Raginwire Telecomm., Inc. (2008)
In addition, under the federal Drug Free Workplace Act of 1998, federal contractors and recipients of federal grants must prohibit the use of marijuana as a condition of participation.
WolfmanHarris
Forum Asst. Chief
- 802
- 101
- 43
The war on drugs really should be ended. It's time to treat this as a public health problem; at least as far as the individual user is concerned. But that doesn't address the problems of this individual medic.
There are a few problems with this situation, per your account:
1) Policy: When you take a job, you accept the policies of that workplace. I have huge problems with workplace policies that extend to far into one's personal life, but as long as you're aware of them when you start, you implicitly accept them; or at least the consequences of disregarding them. This medic was presumably aware that drug tests would be done and continued to smoke marijuana. He must now face the consequences of that decision.
My understanding is that many fire departments in that USA now require FF's be smoke-free as a condition of employment. Were they to be tested and found to be a smoker again that would affect their employment; even though the substance is legal.
2) Behaviour: Regardless of the offense, the medic's reaction to the suspension is enough to warrant discipline. Refusing a call in Ontario would also warrant an investigation from the Ministry of Health.
There are a few problems with this situation, per your account:
1) Policy: When you take a job, you accept the policies of that workplace. I have huge problems with workplace policies that extend to far into one's personal life, but as long as you're aware of them when you start, you implicitly accept them; or at least the consequences of disregarding them. This medic was presumably aware that drug tests would be done and continued to smoke marijuana. He must now face the consequences of that decision.
My understanding is that many fire departments in that USA now require FF's be smoke-free as a condition of employment. Were they to be tested and found to be a smoker again that would affect their employment; even though the substance is legal.
2) Behaviour: Regardless of the offense, the medic's reaction to the suspension is enough to warrant discipline. Refusing a call in Ontario would also warrant an investigation from the Ministry of Health.
Melclin
Forum Deputy Chief
- 1,796
- 4
- 0
Stoners Vs Squares
I'm ganna need more popcorn.
I'm ganna need more popcorn.
medicRob
Forum Deputy Chief
- 1,754
- 3
- 0
Meidcal marijuana laws are at the discretion of the STATE. Marijuana is still illegal FEDERALLY. The Federal government has been asked, however to stand down and "not pursue" in situations like Colorado where medical marijuana is legal with a special license via state law. However, this will not always protect you. There is an individual from Colorado right now who started a dispensary, and even after the order from the executive branch to the DEA to stand down, this individual was pursued and is now facing a very long prison stent (15 years +)
http://www.safeaccessnow.org/section.php?id=344
http://www.safeaccessnow.org/section.php?id=327
The above was posted to correct a previous post who said it was Federal law and that states were told to stand down.
Now, as for my views.. I am prescribed to a couple of medications that I can't take while operating an ambulance.. The same thing applies with Marijuana, I suppose.
http://www.safeaccessnow.org/section.php?id=344
http://www.safeaccessnow.org/section.php?id=327
The above was posted to correct a previous post who said it was Federal law and that states were told to stand down.
Now, as for my views.. I am prescribed to a couple of medications that I can't take while operating an ambulance.. The same thing applies with Marijuana, I suppose.
Last edited by a moderator:
rwik123
Forum Asst. Chief
- 718
- 7
- 18
There seems to be a whole social taboo behind the use of marijuana. I'm not really against it, although I have never smoked it myself. My view is that people should be able to do it if they wish, especially when compared to alcohol. It comes down to facts; people do not smoke weed and beat the crap out of their wives. Weed does not make someone a belligerent individual. Some people become complete monsters when under the influence of alcohol, so in my opinion, alcohol is the worse enemy.
Now granted all that... I don't think anyone who uses marijuana should be having any patient contact, because weed still does affect judgment and reasoning, something that is key in ems. Even if it is medical weed, he shouldn't be able to be employed.
281mustang
Forum Lieutenant
- 230
- 12
- 18
Eh, I personally don't see a problem with a MM patient working in EMS. With that said even IF Illinois was a MM state this particular medic should obviously not be in EMS to begin with.