Comments on: The Sneaky “Drunk” http://www.epmonthly.com/whitecoat/2012/11/the-sneaky-drunk/ A blog from inside the emergency department Wed, 19 Jun 2013 05:14:04 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.5.1 By: Stan Forron http://www.epmonthly.com/whitecoat/2012/11/the-sneaky-drunk/#comment-106509 Stan Forron Sun, 18 Nov 2012 07:16:52 +0000 http://www.epmonthly.com/whitecoat/?p=8741#comment-106509 Generally you can refuse to take a breath test (or any other field sobriety test), but doing so gives the state the right to revoke your license for several years. Still better than a DUI, fines, court costs, attorney fees, and your license is still revoked, though.

]]> By: Tarl http://www.epmonthly.com/whitecoat/2012/11/the-sneaky-drunk/#comment-106005 Tarl Wed, 14 Nov 2012 20:51:33 +0000 http://www.epmonthly.com/whitecoat/?p=8741#comment-106005 However drunk the patient might have been, he evidently had a couple of functioning brain cells left. Too bad he waited until the ER to use them.

The custody of samples issue is generally somewhat more worrisome – we saw this with the current testing lab scandal in Massachusetts. With poor controls on custody and handling of lab samples, trusting lab work to make criminal conviction decisions becomes problematic.

The sports world (which has money on the line) has addressed the problem by having samples split at the time of taking, and supposedly no single person ever again handles both samples.

]]> By: Seth Trueger http://www.epmonthly.com/whitecoat/2012/11/the-sneaky-drunk/#comment-105989 Seth Trueger Wed, 14 Nov 2012 17:42:01 +0000 http://www.epmonthly.com/whitecoat/?p=8741#comment-105989 no “implied consent” to breathalyzer?

]]>