EMT under investigation for alleged touching incident

Epi-do

Epi-do

I see dead people
Messages
1,947
Reaction score
9
Points
38
I caught the tail end of this story on the news tonight. I used to work for this company, but know nothing of this incident, except for what is being reported.

Full Story Here

Steve Jefferson/Eyewitness News

Speedway - A man who works for a living helping medical patients stands accused of taking advantage of one.

The sexual assault allegations involve a man who works at Care Ambulance Service. While the company is headquartered in Kentucky, they are garaged on Gasoline Alley in Speedway.

A 31-year-old woman says a Care EMT worker touched her inappropriately as she rode in the back of an ambulance.

Read More Here
 
Such a touching story.
 
Inappropriate touching while the patient was seizing? The PD trying to get DNA and prosecute with it?
Something about this story just rubs me the wrong way.
 
hm.... I don't know. I would have to be there to pass judgment. Would the patient be aware of what was happening while they were having a seizure? (At least enough to get someone fired?)

It's probably going to be decided based on his character. If everyone he works with testifies that he would never think of doing something like that, then he'll probably get off.
 
I doubt a seizing patient would be self aware enough to notice being touched while seizing.

Considering his hand SHOULD have been gloved, I wonder what kind of DNA they think they're going to get..
 
Okay, I'm done with the puns. Here's what I'm wondering:

1. She was seizing and he did touch her inappropriately. How did she notice?
2. She was not seizing and he did touch her inappropriately. Why is she claiming that she was seizing?
3. She was seizing and he did not (intentionally?) touch her inappropriately. Easy enough to see how that could have happened. Sucks for everyone, though.
4. She was not seizing and he did not touch her inappropriately. Why is she claiming both of those?

If I read that article right, the PD proposes to recover DNA that he left on her skin by touching her with a presumably gloved hand, days after the fact. How did anyone hear that statement without facepalming? In the meantime, he's out of work and in essence needs to prove a negative to get back. That strikes me as a bit unfair.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
There is more than one type of "inappropriate touching" and it doesn't have to be with a hand.
 
The article emphasized "touch DNA" as a separate and new technology. I don't think they'd be extolling the novel crime-fighting advantages of the rape kit.
Meh, it's all speculation at this point, and I doubt they'll run a followup article if charges are dropped.
 
Keep in mind that the article does not mention what type of seizure the patient was having. There are many different types, with just as many presentations and effects upon the patient's awareness. I know everyone automatically thinks full body, tonic-clonic type seizures but what if she was actually having a focal (simple partial) seizure? It is entirely possible to have this type of seizure and still be aware of what is going on around you.

I am not saying that the patient is or isn't making this up or that the tech did or didn't do something inappropriate. What I am saying is that just like every other story reported by the media, there is plenty that we do not know about the situation. I will try to continue to follow this story and let everyone know if I hear anything additional.

As far as the DNA goes, it sounds like she reported it as soon as she arrived at RHI, so the DNA sampling would have been done relatively soon after the event, not days later. When it comes to gloves, I know plenty of people while I was working private services that are pretty lax about wearing them, so assuming he had them on doesn't necesarily mean that he did.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
This just doesnt seem right

If pt was having a seizure how would they know there was inappropriate touching. How could they test DNA from a gloved hand?
 
That assumes he was wearing gloves.
 
Pass the Doritos....crunch crunch

Where's Jerry Springer when he's needed?

The larger question is how protected are you and what is your recourse when/if accused of this battery when you are alone with a pt? Good time to wonder why you don't have a union.
 
mycrofft said:
Good time to wonder why you don't have a union.
Click to expand...

What makes you think a union will run interference with a police investigation or provide a criminal defense attorney?

Here is another case that is on trial now:
http://www.wickedlocal.com/boxborou...-for-Boxborough-EMT-accused-of-sexual-assault

Trial starts for Boxborough EMT accused of sexual assault

By Christian Schiavone/Staff Writer

Wed Nov 19, 2008, 09:19 PM EST


Concord - The trial started Wednesday in the case of a Boxborough firefighter/EMT who is accused of sexually assaulting a woman in the back of the town’s ambulance on the way to the hospital.

Thomas E. Sherr, a 47-year-old Maynard resident, is charged with four counts of indecent assault and battery on a person aged 14 years or older for the alleged inappropriate touching a Stow woman’s genitals while transporting her from Acton to Emerson Hospital in Concord on July 21, 2007.

The alleged victim, whose name is being withheld by The Beacon, testified that Sherr placed his hand underneath her clothing while she was strapped to a backboard. She was suffering from neck and upper back pain following a minor car accident earlier that day in Acton.


“It felt like a violation,” the woman said during more than an hour on the witness stand. “In a snap I moved from absolute safety to absolute fear.”
Click to expand...
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Because your union considers you innocent until proven and retains lawyers.

You pay them good money for that. If your union doesn't, fire it and certify another.

Your employer will rapidly fire you to distance itself from your actions ("How deplorable!") to avoid being deep-pocketed. Your union will defend you unless it thinks you did it and you are too hot to handle (say, one of the Bush twins is the complaintant). Your union may also carry your additional (probably your ONLY) malpractice insurance.

You know what, forget malpractice. Battery is a classic felony. Even if it is a con and the plaintiff decides she made enough money or the con is "wearing thin" (getting risky), the state attorney, the district attorney, etc., can still file felony charges and the con artist can be compelled to testify, truthfully or not, willingly or not. You fall for that felony, or word gets out you were brought to trial, and you can forget a lot of opportunities lost to innuendo. You darn well need to "lawyer-up" and quick, and the union shold be looking out for you by trying to save your job, then your neck.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
how would someone seizing (even partial seizure) be coherent enough to realize what is happening? and another thing.. how many times during yalls transfers was fondling someone the first thing on your mind. I would think that would be the last thing on a tech's mind. especially if the patient is having a seizure. I would think that at least they would be trying to monitor the patient.. not fondle them.. whats up with that?? I think its a false accusation if you ask me.
 
Yes this may be a false accusation. However, in order to keep the public's trust, I think we have to make sure that the public sees that we take sexual misconduct seriously and that the profession will investigate thoroughly any allegations and take appropriate actions. Patients who call an ambulance already feel vulnerable enough without having to be concerned about this kind of behavior. At the same time I don't want to make providers scared to touch patients. Emergency medicine is hands on and touching and palpating are essential to a good assessment in many instances. Professional behavior and appropriate boundaries are our best protection against unfounded charges. This probably sounds like a sermon, but there are enough examples where organisations have not taken action or even actively covered up misconduct and are paying for that behavior. EMS doesn't need to fall into that pit.
 
I agree.. that was just my opinion on this one instance.. ;) and I hope that through all appropriate actions taken it will prove to our patients/ future or present that they should not have to worry about this type of vulnerability. I hope that our patients should be able to trust us and not be afraid of calling when they need help. It would be a shame if because of an instance where one of the provider's misconduct would make them think twice about calling for help.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I think alot of what is needed is education to the public of what is and isnt appripriate for pre hospital care providers to due. Because most people have no idea what we can touch and have it be appropriate for proper pt care. I always make a point to explain to my pt whats im doing every time I have to touch them. But one of my friends recently got into something like this, he picked up a girl the crashed her bicycle over one of the gaurd rails over the side of the road, enroute to the hospital he was giving a secondary to her and she flipped when he was checking her ribs (bare in mind the was the lower ribs below the chest) she tried to accuse him of inappropriate touching, he was eventually cleared but she forgot to mention that he said to her he was going to check his ribs to make sure there were no injuries there, but it was still scary for him. but just suppose the point people need to know what we can and cant do or at least more of a point for prehospital providers to explain what they are doing while they do it (given the pt is coherent enough to listen)
 
The sad truth is that one accusation of this nature however false can ruin a person's reputation.

There are cases where the charged was not only found not guilty because the prosecution couldn't meet the burden of proof, but where the defense could actually PROVE that the accuser was not being truthful or at least that the defendant was innocent. Unfortunately, even in these cases a person's reputation could take a while to recover.

I personally believe that these accusations should not be aired to the public until they are proven and that such behavior of airing these accusation sin public, if found false, should be criminal (similar to slander/libel but w/o the burden of proof that the person knowingly produced false statments) since even careless statements can cause so much harm.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top