Drug Mule Shielded By Bellevue Band Of Doctors

A doctor found 14 bags of coke in a patient during emergency surgery. Not 14 liters of Coke. That was 14 bags of cocaine. He reported the illegal drugs to police but refused to provide more details… like the patient’s name and address. He cited “doctor-patient confidentiality.” The NYPD was incensed claiming that the laws don’t protect drug mules. Bellevue hospital officials claim that they “cooperated within the limits of the law.” With no help forthcoming, police did their detective worked and tracked down and arrested the suspect at the hospital. “D-P” confidentiality rules should be reviewed or ended when the public is put at risk by the patient. This guy was no harmless piñata carrying candy.

▼
IMPORTANT NOTE: This piece was written today about an older New York City news headline. NYCo site delays prevented its publication before now. In an effort to entertain and educate this blog’s devoted viewers, 100’s of older headlines will be posted in chronological order until this blog is discussing current events again. Though some stories may no longer be as relevant as they once were, they remain interesting news items worthy of mention and viewer comments.

[This is a copyrighted editorial, originally published on http://www.NEWYORKCITYonline.com/NYC-Online/blog.php. We invite you to post your comments and reply to others. This piece may be duplicated or printed with permission.]

NYPD Clipped From Cutting Hair

The courts “just said no” to a type of drug testing preferred by the NYPD. The Police Department’s change from random urine testing to comprehensive hair testing was recently cut down in an appeals court. The union representing New York City cops, detectives and sergeants claimed the city never negotiated for their approval during collective bargaining agreements. They also argued that “bald” cops were subjected to “invasive” screening because hair samples from them were taken from legs or pubic areas. The NYPD countered, claiming it didn’t have to bargain because only the “testing technology” changed, not the policy. It sounds like one or both parties are "splitting fine hairs," here. Hair testing can screen for drug use going back 90 days vs. only a few days for urine tests. That fact alone makes it imperative for the safety of citizens and police officers. We must implement this form of illegal drug screening. Not only that, it makes sample cheating more difficult. The city will look for other ways to implement this vital program. What was hair once may be hair again.