Medical amnesty policy

Last updated

Medical amnesty policies are laws or acts enacted protecting from liability those who seek medical attention as a result of illegal actions. Such policies have been developing most notably in colleges in the United States regarding alcohol use by students. Schools such as Cornell University have implemented such policies to protect students seeking medical attention from illegal action for underage drinking and possession of alcohol and/or other drugs. The purpose of such policies is to reduce the hesitation caused by fear of legal action to seek medical attention. [1] Similar policies are applicable at many levels: colleges and universities, local communities, as well as state governments. In 2012, The Medical Amnesty Initiative was started with the specific purpose of advocating for the introduction, passage, and education of medical amnesty legislation throughout the United States. [2]

Contents

Development

Medical amnesty policies were first present in the university setting. Although failure to seek medical assistance in cases of alcohol poisoning can lead to fatal outcomes, evidence suggests that the threat of judicial consequences resulting from enforcement of the minimum drinking age or other law or policy violations leads some students to refrain from calling for emergency medical services. A study was initiated in 2002 at Cornell University to investigate if implementation of a Medical amnesty policy increase the likelihood that students will call for help in alcohol-related medical emergencies; and increase the likelihood that students treated for alcohol-related medical emergencies will receive a brief psycho-educational intervention at the university health center as a follow-up to their medical treatment.

In April 2009, more than 100 college and university presidents signed the Amethyst Initiative. [3] The Amethyst Initiative seeks to spark discussion about the current drinking age, problems related to underage drinking, and to develop new ideas about the best ways to prepare young adults to make responsible decisions about alcohol. [4] One preventative component of this that many campuses have adopted is requiring an online alcohol education course before registering for classes. Another option to better handle underage drinking is the introduction of medical amnesty policies.

Levels of protection

Medical amnesty policies can extend legal protection to varying degrees.

Individual amnesty

Individual amnesty is the most limited level of protection. This level protects individuals who are seeking medical attention for themselves as a result of an illegal action. Individual amnesty does not extend to organizations that person may be a part of or peers also present with the individual at that time.

Victim Amnesty

Amnesty for victims offers more protection than individual amnesty, as it protects individuals requiring medical attention regardless of whether it was the victim or another party who sought help. Victim amnesty does not address the sanctions possible for violating parties besides the victim.

Caller amnesty

These policies, also known as Good Samaritan policies, protects individuals who call for another person seeking medical attention as a result of an illegal action. Liability protection in medical amnesty policies can often extend to those seeking help regardless if they are the one who is given medical assistance. This policy builds on individual amnesty but does not guarantee protection from legal prosecution for an organization the persons are a part of or attending. See also Good Samaritan law.

Organizational amnesty

Protects an organization that is related to the event at which medical attention is sought as a result of an illegal action. Organizational amnesty would extend liability protection to fraternities, sororities, clubs and other social venues that may have people at their location who are under the influence of certain intoxicants. This level of amnesty allows for the largest level of protection and is subsequently the most controversial as well. Various institutions provide medical amnesty to individuals and callers but do not extend amnesty to organizations that may be involved. [5]

Levels of implementation

Colleges and Universities

Many Colleges and Universities hold some level of a Medical amnesty policy. Medical amnesty at the university level most often pertains to exemption from punishment for an intoxicated or impaired underage student if medical assistance is called to help him or her in an emergency situation. Instead of a harsher penalty for underage drinking or drug use, a student usually receives some sort of counseling by a professional following an incident to help identify if the student has a more serious alcohol or drug problem and to provide the student with suggestions on how to stay safe in the future. [6]

Ultimately universities seek to encourage students to call for help, valuing the student's well-being as the primary concern and forgoing punishment for the student's mistake, instead referring students involved to education, community service, and rehabilitation services. Richmond University compiled a list in February 2010 of colleges and universities that have a medical amnesty policy in place as of that time.[ citation needed ] The organization, Students for Sensible Drug Policy, [7] is an extremely strong advocate for expanding medical amnesty policies on college campuses. The organization provides a list of schools who currently have a medical amnesty policy and a description of what the policy includes as well as a brief description of the school. [8]

States

The specifics of Medical Amnesty Acts, or sometimes titled 911 Good Samaritan or 911 Lifeline, vary from state to state. The laws are also in varying stages of development and implementation. The following states have passed a Medical Amnesty law: Alabama, Arkansas, Arizona, California, Colorado, Delaware, Florida, Georgia, Hawaii, Illinois, Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maine, Maryland, Michigan, Minnesota, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, North Carolina, North Dakota, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Oklahoma, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Texas, Utah, Vermont, Virginia, Washington, West Virginia. Washington, D.C. also provides Medical Amnesty protection. Several states also have a Medical Amnesty bill moving through the legislative process.

Michigan’s Medical Amnesty Legislation, House Bill 4393, [9] was signed into law by Governor Rick Snyder on May 8, 2012, and took effect on June 1, 2012. The bill was sponsored by Representative Anthony G. Forlini at the request of Steve Marino, Aaron Letzeiser, and the Associated Students of Michigan State University. [10]

On January 4, 2017 the superseding Michigan House Bill 5649 of 2016, which was signed into law by Governor Snyder, became effective as Public Act 307 of 2016. [11] This superseding act expands Michigan's medical amnesty protection to any person, regardless of age, who requests medical assistance for someone who is suffering the effects of a drug or alcohol emergency, as well as anyone else who is with them. The person suffering from the medical emergency is also protected. The protection from prosecution only covers violations of Michigan's controlled substance and alcohol laws. They still may be prosecuted for non-drug or alcohol related offenses that may be discovered in the course of providing medical assistance.

Federal

No federal legislation has been introduced to date concerning medical amnesty.

The Medical Amnesty Initiative

Following the successful passage of Michigan's Medical Amnesty law, advocate Aaron Letzeiser created The Medical Amnesty Initiative; a non-profit organization dedicated to the introduction, passage, and education of Medical Amnesty legislation throughout the United States. [2]

Effectiveness

Cornell University completed one of the most extensive studies on Medical Amnesty Policies to date. The study found that within two years of implementing a Medical Amnesty (MAP)/Good Samaritan Policy, “students were less likely to report fear of getting an intoxicated person in trouble as a barrier to calling for help. Furthermore, the percentage of students seen by health centre staff for a brief psycho-educational intervention after an alcohol-related emergency more than doubled (from 22% to 52%) by the end of the second year.”

“This finding, combined with the survey data indicating a slight decrease in students’ barriers to calling for help, suggests that the increase in calls for help in an alcohol-related emergency was a function of the MAP and related educational efforts rather than changes in drinking practices.”

“While well-intended, policies and practices at institutions of higher education that are designed to enforce minimum legal drinking age laws and restrict other aspects of alcohol possession and consumption may have negative consequences. For example, such policies may actually deter some students from calling for emergency medical services in dangerous circumstances caused by heavy alcohol use (Colby, Raymond, & Colby, 2000). When alcohol is present, students may be reluctant to seek help in these emergencies because of potential judicial consequences for themselves, the person in need of assistance, or the hosting organization (Meilman, 1992). Often the decision whether to call for help happens late at night and becomes the responsibility of student bystanders whose judgment may be impaired because of their own alcohol consumption.”

“Research suggests that when individuals who are treated for alcohol-related emergencies receive, as part of their follow-up care after the emergency, a brief psycho-educational intervention examining their alcohol use, the likelihood of recurrence is reduced (Longabaughet al.,2001). At Cornell, students are unlikely to avail themselves of such services on a voluntary basis, even when they receive written requests to do so from the director of health services. In contrast, students who are required to participate in such education as a result of judicial action do so consistently. Since September 2001, the standard requirement for students with a first-time judicial violation has been participation in the Cornell BASICS (Brief Alcohol and Screening Intervention for College Students) program. The Cornell BASICS program was modeled on research that found a two-session screening and feedback process, with elements of motivational interviewing and cognitive-behavioral skills training, to be effective in reducing drinking and the harm associated with high-risk alcohol consumption in the college environment (Baer, Kivlahan, Blume, McKnight, & Marlatt, 2001; Barnett et al., 2004; Borsari & Carey, 2000; Dimeff, Baer, Kivlahan, & Marlatt, 1999; Marlatt et al., 1998).”

"A random sample survey of Cornell undergraduates conducted in the spring of 2000 found that 19% of respondents reported thinking about calling for help because they were concerned about someone who was severely intoxicated, though only 4% actually called for help. The most frequently cited reason for not calling for help was that the respondent was not sure if the person was sick enough (9.3%). The next highest reason given was because the respondent did not want to get the distressed individual in trouble (3.8%).” [12]

Criticisms

Many people have criticized medical amnesty policies as policies that perpetuate underage drinking. Critics note that the goal of ameliorating the issue of youth alcohol consumption and drug abuse should focus more on preventing such activities rather than simply providing a more open course of action once choices have been made. [5] An alternative explanation could be that the increase in calls for help reflects an increase in heavy drinking among the student population resulting in a larger percentage of students in need of emergency assistance. [13]

See also

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Good Samaritan law</span> Legal protection for rescuers

Good Samaritan laws offer legal protection to people who give reasonable assistance to those who are, or whom they believe to be injured, ill, in peril, or otherwise incapacitated. The protection is intended to reduce bystanders' hesitation to assist, for fear of being sued or prosecuted for unintentional injury or wrongful death. An example of such a law in common-law areas of Canada: a Good Samaritan doctrine is a legal principle that prevents a rescuer who has voluntarily helped a victim in distress from being successfully sued for wrongdoing. Its purpose is to keep people from being reluctant to help a stranger in need for fear of legal repercussions should they make some mistake in treatment. By contrast, a duty to rescue law requires people to offer assistance and holds those who fail to do so liable.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Drinking culture</span> Aspect of human behavior

Drinking culture is the set of traditions and social behaviors that surround the consumption of alcoholic beverages as a recreational drug and social lubricant. Although alcoholic beverages and social attitudes toward drinking vary around the world, nearly every civilization has independently discovered the processes of brewing beer, fermenting wine and distilling spirits.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Driving under the influence</span> Driving a motor vehicle while under the influence of an impairing substance

Driving under the influence (DUI) is the offense of driving, operating, or being in control of a vehicle while impaired by alcohol or drugs, to a level that renders the driver incapable of operating a motor vehicle safely. Multiple other terms are used for the offense in various jurisdictions.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Legal drinking age</span> Minimum age at which a person can legally consume alcoholic beverages

The legal drinking age is the minimum age at which a person can legally consume alcoholic beverages. The minimum age alcohol can be legally consumed can be different from the age when it can be purchased in some countries. These laws vary between countries and many laws have exemptions or special circumstances. Most laws apply only to drinking alcohol in public places with alcohol consumption in the home being mostly unregulated. Some countries also have different age limits for different types of alcohol drinks.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">National Minimum Drinking Age Act</span> 1984 U.S. law which indirectly raised the nationwide minimum drinking age to 21

The National Minimum Drinking Age Act of 1984 was passed by the United States Congress and was later signed into law by President Ronald Reagan on July 17, 1984. The act would punish any state that allowed persons under 21 years to purchase alcoholic beverages by reducing its annual federal highway apportionment by 10 percent. The law was later amended, lowering the penalty to 8 percent from fiscal year 2012 and beyond.

Alcohol education is the practice of disseminating information about the effects of alcohol on health, as well as society and the family unit. It was introduced into the public schools by temperance organizations such as the Woman's Christian Temperance Union in the late 19th century. Initially, alcohol education focused on how the consumption of alcoholic beverages affected society, as well as the family unit. In the 1930s, this came to also incorporate education pertaining to alcohol's effects on health. For example, even light and moderate alcohol consumption increases cancer risk in individuals. Organizations such as the National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism in the United States were founded to promulgate alcohol education alongside those of the temperance movement, such as the American Council on Alcohol Problems.

Brief intervention can often be referred to as screening and brief intervention (SBI) or, in England, identification and brief advice (IBA). Brief interventions are a technique used to initiate change for an unhealthy or risky behaviour such as smoking, lack of exercise or alcohol misuse. This page primarily describes brief interventions as applied to alcohol. As an alcohol intervention it is typically targeted to non-dependent drinkers, or drinkers who might be experiencing problems but are not seeking treatment. It is an approach which aims to prevent the acceleration or impact of alcohol problems, and/or to reduce alcohol consumption. It can be carried out in a range of settings such as in primary care, emergency or other hospital departments, criminal justice settings, workplaces, online, university/college settings, and other settings.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Alcohol consumption by youth in the United States</span> Alcohol consumption by individuals under the age of 18 in the country

Although the minimum legal age to purchase alcohol is 21 in all U.S. states and most territories, the legal details for consumption vary greatly. Although some states completely ban alcohol usage for people under 18, the majority have exceptions that permit consumption.

In the United States, a Minor in Possession or a MIP, is any person under the legal drinking age of 21 who possesses or consumes alcohol. Underage consumption is illegal, typically a misdemeanor. In California, depending on the county in which the person is charged, the crime may also be charged as an infraction. Anyone under the age of 21 who possesses alcohol in the United States with the exception of special circumstances is violating the law of the state.

0-0-1-3 is an alcohol abuse prevention program developed in 2004 at Francis E. Warren Air Force Base based on research by the National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism regarding binge drinking in college students. This program was a command-led collaboration between unit leaders, base agencies, and base personnel that utilized a three-tiered approach: (1) identify and assist high risk drinkers; (2) Develop a base culture, supportive of safe and responsible behaviors, including recreational options; and (3) Partnering with the broader community to promote alcohol prevention.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Public Health Security and Bioterrorism Preparedness and Response Act of 2002</span>

Signed into effect on 12 June 2002, the Public Health Security and Bioterrorism Preparedness and Response Act of 2002, (PHSBPRA) was signed by the President, the Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) and the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA).

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Youth rights</span> Equal rights movement

The youth rights movement seeks to grant the rights to young people that are traditionally reserved for adults, due to having reached a specific age or sufficient maturity. This is closely akin to the notion of evolving capacities within the children's rights movement, but the youth rights movement differs from the children's rights movement in that the latter places emphasis on the welfare and protection of children through the actions and decisions of adults, while the youth rights movement seeks to grant youth the liberty to make their own decisions autonomously in the ways adults are permitted to, or to lower the legal minimum ages at which such rights are acquired, such as the age of majority and the voting age.

Foundation for Advancing Alcohol Responsibility (Responsibility.org), formerly known as the Century Council, is an American not-for-profit organization founded in 1991 and funded by a group of distillers that aims to fight to eliminate drunk driving and underage drinking and promotes responsible decision-making regarding alcohol use.

The Amethyst Initiative is an organization made up of U.S. college presidents and chancellors that, in July 2008, launched a movement calling for the reconsideration of U.S. legal drinking age, particularly the minimum age of 21.

Ronald McKinnon is a Canadian politician, who was elected to represent the riding of Coquitlam—Port Coquitlam in the House of Commons of Canada in the 2015 federal election, and was re-elected in 2019 and 2021.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Binge drinking</span> Form of excessive alcohol intake

Binge drinking, or heavy episodic drinking, is drinking alcoholic beverages with an intention of becoming intoxicated by heavy consumption of alcohol over a short period of time, but definitions vary considerably.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Alcohol laws of New Jersey</span> Laws governing alcoholic beverages in New Jersey

The state laws governing alcoholic drinks in New Jersey are among the most complex in the United States, with many peculiarities not found in other states' laws. They provide for 29 distinct liquor licenses granted to manufacturers, wholesalers, retailers, and for the public warehousing and transport of alcoholic drinks. General authority for the statutory and regulatory control of alcoholic drinks rests with the state government, particularly the Division of Alcoholic Beverage Control overseen by the state's Attorney General.

The legal drinking age varies from country to country. In the United States, the legal drinking age is currently 21. To curb excessive alcohol consumption by younger people, instead of raising the drinking age, other countries have raised the prices of alcohol beverages and encouraged the general public to drink less. Setting a legal drinking age of 21 is designed to discourage reckless alcohol consumption by youth, limiting consumption to those who are more mature, who can be expected to make reasonable and wise decisions when it comes to drinking.

The Stronger Futures policy is a multifaceted social policy of the Australian government concerning the Aboriginal population of the Northern Territory. It is underpinned by the Stronger Futures in the Northern Territory Act 2012, which ceases to have effect 10 years after its commencement on 29 June 2012.

Many students attending colleges, universities, and other higher education institutions consume alcoholic beverages. The laws and social culture around this practice vary by country and institution type, and within an institution, some students may drink heavily whereas others may not drink at all. In the United States, drinking tends to be particularly associated with fraternities.

References

  1. Oster-Aaland, Laura; Eighmy, Myron A. (2007). "Medical Amnesty Policies: Research is Needed". NASPA Journal. 44 (4). doi:10.2202/0027-6014.1865 . Retrieved 2009-02-19.
  2. 1 2 "Home". medicalamnesty.org.
  3. Amethyst Initiative.
  4. "Can Medical Amnesty Bring Sense to Underage Drinking Debate?". ABC News .
  5. 1 2 Lewis, Deborah K.; Timothy C. Marchell (2006). "Safety first: A medical amnesty approach to alcohol poisoning at a U.S. university" (PDF). International Journal of Drug Policy. 17 (4): 329–338. doi:10.1016/j.drugpo.2006.02.007 . Retrieved 2009-02-19.
  6. "Medical Amnesty". The Gordie Foundation. Archived from the original on 2011-05-01. Retrieved 2011-04-04.
  7. Students for a Sensible Drug Policy
  8. The research into participating schools is published on their website, Good Samaritan Policy Research : Schools with policies Archived 2010-11-12 at the Wayback Machine .
  9. "Michigan Legislature - House Bill 4393 (2011)".
  10. "Medical amnesty bill passes in Mich. Senate".
  11. "Michigan Legislature - House Bill 5649 (2016)".
  12. Lewis, Deborah K.; Timothy C. Marchell (2006). "Safety first: A medical amnesty approach to alcohol poisoning at a U.S. university". International Journal of Drug Policy. 17 (4): 329–338. doi:10.1016/j.drugpo.2006.02.007. Archived from the original on 2011-07-26.
  13. "Archived copy" (PDF). Archived from the original (PDF) on 2012-03-20. Retrieved 2011-02-24.{{cite web}}: CS1 maint: archived copy as title (link)