Police should target troublesome drunks, A&E boss says
Discussion
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-30614864
He's also quite ignorant to the re-offending probabilities and disposals. Issuing people with an FPN, which they can 'waiver' by attended alcohol education sessions has the lowest re-offending rate we see.
I'll make him a deal, if he can get the NHS's mental health services to do their jobs correctly, I'll send the officers doing their job to A&E
Perhaps he isn't aware, since the NHS is practically protected, that unprecedented savings across the CJS mean that higher priority matters will receive the attention.
BBC said:
Police should crack down on binge drinking to stop hospital staff being distracted by disorderly drunks, a leading doctor has said.
Dr Clifford Mann, president of the College of Emergency Medicine, said the "softer approach" used for anti-social drunkenness did not seem to be working.
Police could instead increase arrests, convictions and fines, he suggested.
Police Federation chair Steve White said the police force did not have the resources for such an approach.
The coalition had improved the powers available to the police and licensing authorities to tackle alcohol-related crime, and had banned the "worst cases of very cheap and harmful alcohol sales", the Liberal Democrat MP said.
Speaking to the BBC, Dr Mann said: "All I am saying at the moment is the softer approach - where we don't any longer arrest many people for being drunk and disorderly - certainly doesn't seem to be working."
He said the number of people arriving at A&E units while drunk was increasing year on year, while the number of licensed premises in the UK was also increasing and alcohol was getting cheaper.
"I think these people, by the nature of the disorder, they are distracting medical and nursing staff from looking after other patients and therefore are wasting public resources," he said.
"I think they therefore fall into the category of being drunk and disorderly in their behaviour and the police can act to take them away."
But Mr White told the BBC that cuts to the police force had left 16,000 fewer officers in the country so a "zero tolerance" policy was impossible.
He said police were also frustrated with having to deal with drunk people, and cells were already full with people in similar conditions every Friday and Saturday night.
He added that courts, social services, ambulances and the government all had a role to play in reducing the number of people getting drunk and disorderly - and not solely the police.
The Doctor (in the interview video) is now apparently suggesting he was talking about the 'hangers-on', and not the patients being D&D. From reading other quotes from his statement, I think he's trying to change his angle as it seems clear to me he was talking about the patients. He's surprised at the "traction" he has got from his comments. I'm not. Just so people know, if we arrest a disruptive drunk patient, we then have two officers at A&E all night whilst they sober-up.Dr Clifford Mann, president of the College of Emergency Medicine, said the "softer approach" used for anti-social drunkenness did not seem to be working.
Police could instead increase arrests, convictions and fines, he suggested.
Police Federation chair Steve White said the police force did not have the resources for such an approach.
The coalition had improved the powers available to the police and licensing authorities to tackle alcohol-related crime, and had banned the "worst cases of very cheap and harmful alcohol sales", the Liberal Democrat MP said.
Speaking to the BBC, Dr Mann said: "All I am saying at the moment is the softer approach - where we don't any longer arrest many people for being drunk and disorderly - certainly doesn't seem to be working."
He said the number of people arriving at A&E units while drunk was increasing year on year, while the number of licensed premises in the UK was also increasing and alcohol was getting cheaper.
"I think these people, by the nature of the disorder, they are distracting medical and nursing staff from looking after other patients and therefore are wasting public resources," he said.
"I think they therefore fall into the category of being drunk and disorderly in their behaviour and the police can act to take them away."
But Mr White told the BBC that cuts to the police force had left 16,000 fewer officers in the country so a "zero tolerance" policy was impossible.
He said police were also frustrated with having to deal with drunk people, and cells were already full with people in similar conditions every Friday and Saturday night.
He added that courts, social services, ambulances and the government all had a role to play in reducing the number of people getting drunk and disorderly - and not solely the police.
He's also quite ignorant to the re-offending probabilities and disposals. Issuing people with an FPN, which they can 'waiver' by attended alcohol education sessions has the lowest re-offending rate we see.
I'll make him a deal, if he can get the NHS's mental health services to do their jobs correctly, I'll send the officers doing their job to A&E
Perhaps he isn't aware, since the NHS is practically protected, that unprecedented savings across the CJS mean that higher priority matters will receive the attention.
ging84 said:
for many it is a hobby, instead of trying 'solve' the problem, they should just deal with it
The qustion no govt appears to asks is: why the impulsion to get drunk? what is it that makes so many (esp. us brits) want to escape their reality so badly and in such a messy way?Ask the deeper questions, and we all might get somewhere.
Huff said:
The qustion no govt appears to asks is: why the impulsion to get drunk? what is it that makes so many (esp. us brits) want to escape their reality so badly and in such a messy way?
Ask the deeper questions, and we all might get somewhere.
Indeed. And then what happens to society when that 'escape' route is removed?Ask the deeper questions, and we all might get somewhere.
Indeed, I saw him interviewed on BBC news yesterday where he was trying to change his angle to get rid of the drunken 'hangers on' who arrive with people needing medical attention. So really, all they're doing is taking up waiting room real estate, as they're not actually getting into the wards and the areas where doctors work. Also, his assertion that they are drunk, and therefore disorderly, is rubbish. He seems to be completely overlooking the fact that there is a necessity test to meet on making an arrest and I can't imagine an officer being convinced it would be met by someone simply being drunk and a little rowdy.
It's funny though that he didn't take the time to thank the police for their efforts as an ad hoc ambulance service, stand in paramedics, first aiders and first responders. Or indeed, scoping out jobs that have been phoned in to the ambulance service to see if they're actually worth sending a crew to. Or indeed, all the time police spend doing mental health work and sitting waiting in 136 suites.
It's funny though that he didn't take the time to thank the police for their efforts as an ad hoc ambulance service, stand in paramedics, first aiders and first responders. Or indeed, scoping out jobs that have been phoned in to the ambulance service to see if they're actually worth sending a crew to. Or indeed, all the time police spend doing mental health work and sitting waiting in 136 suites.
Tribal Chestnut said:
Huff said:
The qustion no govt appears to asks is: why the impulsion to get drunk? what is it that makes so many (esp. us brits) want to escape their reality so badly and in such a messy way?
Ask the deeper questions, and we all might get somewhere.
Indeed. And then what happens to society when that 'escape' route is removed?Ask the deeper questions, and we all might get somewhere.
Human beings have sought temporary escape through mind altering substances ever since they were discovered thousands of years ago, it's not new and other than the societal costs not especially troubling.
IMHO those who are falling down drunk should be thrown into a drunk tank with others and left to sober up. If they choke on their own vomit well tough s
t!!! THEN fine them £1000,- or ten days hard labour, or 250 hours community service in orange suits.....
NO sympathy what so ever for such idiots!
t!!! THEN fine them £1000,- or ten days hard labour, or 250 hours community service in orange suits.....NO sympathy what so ever for such idiots!
JMGS4 said:
IMHO those who are falling down drunk should be thrown into a drunk tank with others and left to sober up. If they choke on their own vomit well tough st!!! THEN fine them £1000,- or ten days hard labour, or 250 hours community service in orange suits.....
NO sympathy what so ever for such idiots!
You seem to be the only idiot in need of such sentencing. What's wrong with getting 'falling down' drunk - if you and your mates have had a good time, haven't harmed anyone else and all got home safely and without incident then what's wrong with that?t!!! THEN fine them £1000,- or ten days hard labour, or 250 hours community service in orange suits.....NO sympathy what so ever for such idiots!
Brighton set up a licensing unit, inspector (part time), sergeant and five. It's job was merely to ensure that the licencees committed no offences against the licencing acts. The main method was to visit licensed premises, in uniform, at all times of day and night whilst open.
It had a difficult start, with officers not being welcomed, but after a few weeks, and a few prosecutions, things turned around.
After a year or so we got to the situation where there were no drunks in pubs and clubs, the premises could be properly supervised, and public order problems dropped no end. And this in a town that survived on clubbing.
The division got a new super who felt it important that he do something to get noticed so dumped the most effective squad I've ever seen and replaced it with one civilian. She did her best but things soon reverted to the pre-squad days.
The licensing unit proved to me that the main cause for the public order problems of drunkenness was/is licensed premises ignoring the restrictions placed on them and serving drunks and having drunks on their premises.
Drunks and druggies: out of the two, the latter is easier to deal with.
If a person is found unable to look after him/herself due to intoxication, they should be removed from the street and then charged for the procedures. This would include storage and medical.
It had a difficult start, with officers not being welcomed, but after a few weeks, and a few prosecutions, things turned around.
After a year or so we got to the situation where there were no drunks in pubs and clubs, the premises could be properly supervised, and public order problems dropped no end. And this in a town that survived on clubbing.
The division got a new super who felt it important that he do something to get noticed so dumped the most effective squad I've ever seen and replaced it with one civilian. She did her best but things soon reverted to the pre-squad days.
The licensing unit proved to me that the main cause for the public order problems of drunkenness was/is licensed premises ignoring the restrictions placed on them and serving drunks and having drunks on their premises.
Drunks and druggies: out of the two, the latter is easier to deal with.
If a person is found unable to look after him/herself due to intoxication, they should be removed from the street and then charged for the procedures. This would include storage and medical.
Antony Moxey said:
ou seem to be the only idiot in need of such sentencing. What's wrong with getting 'falling down' drunk - if you and your mates have had a good time, haven't harmed anyone else and all got home safely and without incident then what's wrong with that?
So you get falling down drunk, get to A&E and cause havoc, and stop a heart attack victim from getting proper care and they DIE???? How the feck can you justify getting falling down drunk and cause that??? get real!!! Either grow up and enjoy yourself within limits or get classed as an antisocial pleb!JMGS4 said:
Antony Moxey said:
ou seem to be the only idiot in need of such sentencing. What's wrong with getting 'falling down' drunk - if you and your mates have had a good time, haven't harmed anyone else and all got home safely and without incident then what's wrong with that?
So you get falling down drunk, get to A&E and cause havoc, and stop a heart attack victim from getting proper care and they DIE???? How the feck can you justify getting falling down drunk and cause that??? get real!!! Either grow up and enjoy yourself within limits or get classed as an antisocial pleb!Then again, what if you were falling down drunk, making your way home and you got attacked? It happens, it has happened, so you arrive at hospital in need of attention through no fault of your own yet because you happen to have had a drink you should be tossed aside for someone more deserving.
Perhaps you ought to get real and grow up you hysterical idiot.
I assume he is meaning those who are violent rather than just anyone who happens to drink a lot then end up in A&E for whatever reason (including face planting a kerb)...
What do the officers think? A couple of times when I've been in A&E and had such incidents occur near me, I must confess I thought that police/security should just be allowed to throw them out and refuse them further treatment. Perhaps once they sober up and come back in contrite and not lashing out at nurses/docs they will get treated.
What do the officers think? A couple of times when I've been in A&E and had such incidents occur near me, I must confess I thought that police/security should just be allowed to throw them out and refuse them further treatment. Perhaps once they sober up and come back in contrite and not lashing out at nurses/docs they will get treated.
Jasandjules said:
I assume he is meaning those who are violent rather than just anyone who happens to drink a lot then end up in A&E for whatever reason (including face planting a kerb)...
What do the officers think? A couple of times when I've been in A&E and had such incidents occur near me, I must confess I thought that police/security should just be allowed to throw them out and refuse them further treatment. Perhaps once they sober up and come back in contrite and not lashing out at nurses/docs they will get treated.
Then perhaps he ought to be more clear instead of making sweeping statements.What do the officers think? A couple of times when I've been in A&E and had such incidents occur near me, I must confess I thought that police/security should just be allowed to throw them out and refuse them further treatment. Perhaps once they sober up and come back in contrite and not lashing out at nurses/docs they will get treated.
What is up with people this morning? 
It is the "violent drunk people" we notice (and who get reported in the local 'paper'); they are a very small minority both in society and in A&E. The assertion that their behaviour affects the treatment of critically ill people and costs others' lives is not factually correct.
The greater number of people who have drunk themselves into insensibility (which is what the original quoted article is about, from my reading of it?) - and especially the vast majority of patients in A&E who wait for hours at any time of day having not drunk alcohol at all - seem to have latterly gone unnoticed in this thread
.
As have the vast majority of the population who can manage to drink (often a fair bit) but still behave well and require no intervention of any kind whatsoever at any point in their adult lives...
Just because something is in the 'media', it isn't necessarily correct or even factual . That the medical professional quoted shows he is hopelessly out of touch with the reality of policing the UK and how the number of licenced premises is changing says it all for me... It is "cloud cuckoo land" stuff 
.
It is the "violent drunk people" we notice (and who get reported in the local 'paper'); they are a very small minority both in society and in A&E. The assertion that their behaviour affects the treatment of critically ill people and costs others' lives is not factually correct.
The greater number of people who have drunk themselves into insensibility (which is what the original quoted article is about, from my reading of it?) - and especially the vast majority of patients in A&E who wait for hours at any time of day having not drunk alcohol at all - seem to have latterly gone unnoticed in this thread
. As have the vast majority of the population who can manage to drink (often a fair bit) but still behave well and require no intervention of any kind whatsoever at any point in their adult lives...
Just because something is in the 'media', it isn't necessarily correct or even factual
. That the medical professional quoted shows he is hopelessly out of touch with the reality of policing the UK and how the number of licenced premises is changing says it all for me... It is "cloud cuckoo land" stuff .Antony Moxey said:
Perhaps you ought to get real and grow up you hysterical idiot.
Nothing hysterical at all, just a grown up who knows how to behave, instead of behaving like a spoilt young brat who has neither manners or upbringing, as all the falling-down drunks seem to be these days.....I completely agree with the doctor. There should be zero tolerance for D&D in A&E and also for violent D&D anywhere.
I'm was particularly disappointed by the Police Fed reaction, which can be summed up as "Not our problem", where clearly it can be.
http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2014/dec/25/two...
JMGS4 said:
Antony Moxey said:
Perhaps you ought to get real and grow up you hysterical idiot.
Nothing hysterical at all, just a grown up who knows how to behave, instead of behaving like a spoilt young brat who has neither manners or upbringing, as all the falling-down drunks seem to be these days.....Forums | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff