Did you ever think that
the day would come where police officers would be allowed to perform blood
draws from the side of a road? This just might happen to you if you are pulled
over for suspicion of drunk driving. Police officers are given more and more discretion
every day, but is this taking it too far? Pushing the envelope a little too
much? What about our rights laid out in the constitution; that are supposed to
be there to protect us? Many believe that forced blood draws are an invasion of
privacy and a violation of the right against self-incrimination.
“The supreme court ruled in 1966 that police could have
blood tests forcibly done on a drunken driving suspect without a warrant, as
long as the draw was based on a reasonable suspicion that a suspect was
intoxicated, that it was done after an arrest and carried out in a medically
approved manner.” (foxnews.com)
Years ago if a person was suspected of driving under the
influence of alcohol and refused a breath test they were transported to a
medical facility where a trained professional otherwise known as a phlebotomist
would take an intravenous blood draw. Now if you live in Arizona the police
officer who pulled you over could very likely be your “trained phlebotomist”
and draw your blood on the side of a dark desolate road. There are many states
that are following in Arizona’s footsteps and doing trial runs to see how
effective this can be to detour drinking and driving. See anything wrong with
this picture?
Are
police officers really the best person to be doing this? What about contamination
of the blood since it was drawn out in the open on the side of the road? What
about the health risks involved for the suspect? Being on the side of the road
isn’t exactly a sterile environment to be drawing blood. For one; a person who
is having their blood drawn should never be standing when this task is being
performed. When officers draw the blood, the suspect is usually standing and
the risk of the person passing out or the officer causing harm to the suspect
increases significantly. The suspect who can be intoxicated; can become angry
and belligerent, possibly pulling the needle from the arm, causing injury to
the suspect and possibly contaminating the officer with bio-hazard material. Vials
can be mixed up, preservative levels in the tubes used to collect the blood can
be off, or the blood can be stored improperly, causing it to ferment and
boosting the alcohol content.
On
top of all this the officers who perform these blood draws in Arizona are not
trained phlebotomists, but have merely completed a one week course which only
had two days of in class instruction on the skill of venipuncture. Once these
police officers receive their venipuncture certificate, they are not required
like regular medical personnel most are never subject to oversight to make sure
they are maintaining their skills and applying them appropriately.
I don’t know about you but if I were ever to be in this circumstance
I would feel very uncomfortable and vulnerable. The idea of not being able to
say no and having my blood drawn by an untrained police officer does not sit
well with me. How long will it be before all of our rights are infringed upon and
we have no say in anything?
I find this entry to be very interesting and troublesome. I would be very upset if I was pulled over and forced to have a blood test on the side of the road. It seems very invasive and unsanitary, especially considering the fact that a breathalyzer is reasonably accurate and noninvasive. I understand that driving under the influence of any substance is dangerous, but there are better ways to go about this. If someone is pulled over and passes a breathalyzer, then the officer should take him or her to a hospital and have them take the blood test. I understand that it would be expensive, but I would think that having officers take people's blood on the side of the road would lead to many expensive lawsuits anyway.
ReplyDeleteThis was probably the most interesting piece of information I have read today. It was so informative and mind shocking at the same time. I didn't know officers were now drawing blood. I find that unbelievable. Officers should do what they are good at, and let the drawing of blood task be handled by the professionals.
ReplyDeleteInteresting post. I didn't know police officers were doing this now. I would be very uncomfortable if a police officer drew my blood. I have a hard enough time letting the professionals draw my blood. I feel like they should just leave this to the professionals.
ReplyDeleteThis is very interesting. I did not know that they were doing this or even thinking about doing this. I really don't think that it is a good idea for officers to be doing blood draws on the side of the road. It should be done in a more sterile environment. Not only for the suspect but also for the safety of the officer. If a suspect happens to get the needle away from the officer and stabs him with it he could be exposed to a number of diseases. I think that the drawing of blood should be left to medical personnel.
ReplyDeleteThis is a rather interesting topic and like most topics in criminal justice there are two sides to the story. I too agree that governmental power is getting out of hand, but there can be an upside to this issue. Chances are if the officer feels the need to get a blood draw from you, you probably did something wrong and deserve to be poked with a needle. I'm not sure how much of a deterrent this would be seeing as there are already numerous laws in place for DUI and those don't seem to stop people from driving under the influence. The other thing is that it's not hard to draw blood. It doesn't take a doctor or nurse to do it. I learned how to give an IV in a day and did so months later in a real life situation without any sort of followup training or re-certification. My point is that I don't have an issue with the officer causing harm to a suspect due to lack of training but I am concerned (like you) for the personal safety of the officer sticking a needle in an intoxicated individual. I'm not saying I agree with this law, just playing devil's advocate.
ReplyDeleteThis is very shocking to hear, I cant believe someone actually thought this would be a good idea. There are so many things wrong with police officers doing this on the side of the road. For one this is a major invasion of privacy, drawing blood should be done in a hospital or doctors office by a trained professional. So many things can go wrong with this regarding safety and health issues. Do we really want an officer who isnt qualified drawing blood on the side of a road by just having reasonable suspicion. I also dont agree the "medically approved manner" is a somewhat qualified officer drawing blood on the side of the road.
ReplyDeleteI don't like the sound of this one bit. First off, I have to laugh when authorities think they can deter drunk driving. I don't believe anyone means to drive drunk. I haven't heard any adrenaline junkies staying drunk driving gives them a rush. This blood drawing idea can't be labeled as a deterrent for drunk driving. It sounds more like a bunch of cops were tired of suspected drunk drivers beating some field sobriety tests. Second, I don't believe police officers should be playing with needles. I've gotten my blood drawn from plenty of nurses who couldn't find my vein. I have no faith in an officer finding one rolling around with a drunk suspect on the street. Lastly, this is not a police officers job and should never be one. This form of quick justice is a disaster waiting to happen. A police department stands to loose more in civil suits than it has to gain.
ReplyDeleteIn my opinion drunk driving is one of those offenses that, no matter what, will never be deterred by reactive approaches of 'what will happen if'. The threat of an individual possibly having his blood drawn on the side of the road if they get caught is not going to act as any better deterrent than the heavy fines and punishment that the offense already carries. This being said, one issue that comes to mind for me is that of a violation of the protections against self-incrimination. Officers being able to conduct such field blood draws without warrants seems like a clear violation of the fifth amendment, because it is literally taking your bodily fluids without a warrant to incriminate you.
ReplyDeleteI completely agree with the author! This is absurd. Police officers are not trained to do this sort of thing and a lot could definitely go wrong. First of all, most people do not like cops and when you mix in alcohol and then point a sharp object at them they are probably going to freak out. This has to be one of the dumbest things I have ever heard. If they want to draw blood that bad then they need to take them to the hospital-a clean and sterile place- for it to be done. If someone refuses a breath test then take them to jail or take them to the hospital. This is so not necessary and I am sure it will fail during this trial that they are doing.
ReplyDeleteGreat post by the way! This is a huge issue and I believe this to be a violation of our rights. It is quite ridiculous that an officer can do this in America. There are plenty of other way to determine if a person is drunk, that is why we have field sobriety test(which are pretty much designed for the offenders to fail). The officer can check the nystagmus which check for involuntary eye movement, the smell of alcohol, slurred speech. There are many ways to check this but it seems that Law Enforcement agencies are trying to find other ways around this in order to get a better chance of conviction. They can arrest for DUI on a number of the things that I mentioned, plus they get the chance to give them a breathalyzer once they get to the lock up. Then I say that they can draw blood if the offender refuses to cooperate after that. The Criminal Justice System has a procedure of checks and balances in order for things like this not to happen, but sometimes they get ahead of themselves and have to step back a little. I do find this as a violation of our 4th and 5th amendment rights and should definitely be looked at more closely.
ReplyDeleteAndrew Serena
This was a very well written article that I personally found to be extremely shocking. I don't understand how police taking your blood at a traffic stop is not a clear violation of our rights as Americans. I am one of the biggest advocates of utilizing strategies in order to prevent drunk driving but I feel that the use of police as "phlebotomists" is definitely going to far. I feel that the current procedure of taking somebody suspected of a DUI to a trained professional to get their blood tested after they fail a field sobriety or breath test is perfectly sufficient. I find it hard to understand why law enforcement feels that is necessary to train officers to draw blood in DUI situations. I think that they should leave that to professionals that are in more sterile and secure environments then on the side of the road which is where the police would have to draw the sample. I hope that this not a method that becomes utilized in the future.
ReplyDeleteI can’t believe this and that states are doing this. I never even heard of this and the thought of someone taking a week course and extracting the blood on the road is just insane. Nurses even have a hard time finding my veins, I wouldn’t want an officer to try and find mine. I think officers should stick with the breathalyzer and filed tests. If need be, the driver should be brought to someone who can take the blood out in the correct setting. When I watched the video I was shocked to see a check point in that manner. Near where I live we have seat belt checks, which are more just to see if someone is driving under the influence. I wonder if this will spread around the U.S.
ReplyDeleteOk I have not heard of this until now. This is crazy, no police office in their right mind should be allowed to draw blood. I dont care if they are trained or not. I would be fighting and screaming during the whole time. This article points out some great facts such as sterial needles, and storage of the blood. What about our constitutional rights and the right to remain slient. This just points out that the government can do what ever they want at anytime.
ReplyDeleteAs much as I like to give the benefit of the doubt to police and their investigative processes, this is messed up. I would say that I'm surprised that this is emerging, but then again, it is arizona which has other outrageous laws such as the racial profiling law to weed out illegal immigrants. Not only is there a risk of injury to the suspect and contamination of the blood, but during a police stop this simple procedure could turn into something way worse. Say the suspect pulls out the needle and assaults an officer with it? This creates too many variables to be worth while. I can attest that it is difficult to draw blood seeing as though even trained professionals have a hard enough time finding my veins when I am in a calm and relaxed/compliant state. To have someone who is facing jail time to be tested on the side of the road is not a good thing because at that point, at least in the offender's eyes, he still has an opportunity to escape. This could cause a high speed pursuit or harm against officers, so I believe we should leave it to the professionals considering refusing a breath test is already grounds for arrest which provides the chance to test them in a controlled environment.
ReplyDelete