Thu Aug 11 19:47:11 EDT 2005
Dave Faneuf wrote:
>Regardless of criminal liability I would think it would certainly be
>within the realm of possiblity that a successful civil suit might be
>filed depending upon the information gathered and withheld and whether or
>not it could have reasonably prevented the catastrophic event.
I would think that would be very likely. Not to mention how career
limiting such a move would be, heavy conscience notwithstanding. I'm a
mandated reporter on two fronts, as a counselor and as an EMT, as it
would pertain to suspicion of abuse of a child, elderly, disabled. But
that is a different situation altogether.
In early EMS trainings, scenarios were floated such as assisting a
patient in his room where illegal substances may be present but not in
plain view and not contributing to the injury. In such a case, an EMT is
ethically expected to not volunteer that information with legal
authorities who may have overlooked the substance. Not something I hope
to ever be faced with.
The hypothetical Dave constructs leads me to think that something of
such grand scale that it could even rise to a national security issue
would make sweeps week never get to happen. File under: If there's no
one to listen and the diaries all melt-down, is it still worthy of a
Fourth Estate ataboy?
More information about the Boston-Radio-Interest