Forget the fact that these hospitals should be aware of the fact poppyseeds can cause false positives, they never should have administered an unauthorized drug test in the first place. That's more horrifying IMO.
Typically this would require a court order.
False. A doctor has zero ability to order tests without patient consent (or consent of a guardian) in the US.
> Patients don’t want to disclose illegal drug use,
This is why medical care should NEVER be directly connected to law enforcement or make conclusions. For a care provider to thing that a patient waking up, handcuffed will make that patient EVER come back for care again is insanity. Medicine should not be about punishment, ever.
Ability isn't the right word, because they absolutely do it. It's unethical and perhaps illegal in some places, but they are able.
I've personally been administered a test non-consensually: I showed up at a hospital with severe pancreatitis, the doctors seemed convinced it was due to alcoholism but I (and my partner who they questioned privately) both reported that I don't drink at all. After several days they suddenly started aggressively treating me, performing tests, etc. I wondered what changed and got hold of my chart-- without my knowledge or consent they took a hair test to assay long term alcohol use and suddenly wanted to treat me when it came back negative.
I get that they needed to exclude an obvious potential cause and couldn't trust the patient to give an honest answer... but the non-consensual test really destroyed my trust. Of course, if they'd asked I would have readily agreed and it isn't as if their skepticism wasn't already apparent.
I disagree with this resigned acceptance to medical paternalism. The basic situation is that you are the patient, and all care should be per your direction. The doctors' responsibility is to treat you based on what you've told them. If you're actually lying, the responsibility for misdiagnosis rests entirely on you.
Doctors hedging against a patient lying should only ever be considered within this larger backdrop. For example independent of the nonconsensual sample and testing, it was severely unethical for them to have delayed your care by several days while indulging their own curiosity.
Able does not always refer to physical ability. It can refer to legal ability.
Huh? So if they pickup my comatose body in an alley, the doctor (or medic!) can’t take test my blood sugar?
A secret drug test on a conscious person who is not showing symptoms of intoxication is pretty far outside of the limits of implied consent.
Irrelevant to know for say, a job (if you can do the work; who cares?) but could be quite relevant if you’re hospitalized, or your new child needs to be treated for withdrawal from it.
Medical consent is more complicated than just this, and what you’re talking about crosses into doctor patient confidentiality as well.
Suffice it to say that testing patients without informed consent and sharing that data with law enforcement is not something that most ethical review boards would condone.
From a practical and moral point of view this kind of incident is what keeps people from telling their doctor all of the relevant information for best care. If you have a drug problem and think a medical provider will work to have your child taken away if you are honest about it, will you ever seek treatment or be honest?
If you don’t have a drug problem, but still think that what you say to your doctor or kids doctor will get used against you, will you hesitate to get care in the future?
Do you think these mothers will ever interact with another pediatrician with full trust again?
> Do you think these mothers will ever interact with another pediatrician with full trust again?
These are already issues. Only what you share with your lawyer is truly privileged. Everything else might get fanned out in a court.
Indeed, if you talk about your seizure with your doctor, your driver's license might get suspended. If you share that your medical condition isn't stable anymore, you may lose your travel health insurance (or pay for it but still get rejected when you make a claim).
Hospitals generally require a very broad consent at admission.
testing for drugs, and then reporting them is a gross fucking violation of patient privacy rights.
That they have the authority doesn't mean they should have the authority. There is nothing more sacrosanct that bodily autonomy. It doesn't matter if the doctor "knows better" or the medical testing you don't opt in for could potentially lead to worse medical outcomes for you. If you are an adult, it should be your right to decide what testing and procedures are performed on you - full stop.