Doctors in turmoil over body searches
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.DOCTORS who are refusing to carry out intimate body searches on criminal suspects without their consent are to meet ministers to discuss their concerns.
Although Home Office guidance says doctors can carry out the searches with impunity, the medical profession has taken a different line.
Doctors believe that if they carry out the searches for drugs or weapons without consent they could be found guilty of serious professional misconduct or even convicted of indecent assault.
Guidance to members of the British Medical Association suggests that not only should they refuse to carry out searches without consent, but that a detainee's consent may be suspect because a refusal can be seen as incriminating.
"Doctors who feel in conscience bound to participate in such procedures should take note that they are personally responsible for the decisions they take," the BMA warns.
Last night a BMA spokeswoman said doctors who were asked to carry out searches were often forced into "interesting" conversations with suspects. They had to say they would not touch the detainee without consent while at the same time suggesting a search by a police officer would be much less pleasant, she said.
"In most cases for the patient it would be better for it to be done by a qualified medical practitioner. But the ethics of it are quite clear - to conduct a search without consent is assault," she said.
Searches for drugs must be carried out in a hospital or surgery, while searches for weapons can take place in a police station. Drugs searches in particular are delicate operations because if heroin is swallowed in a condom which then splits there is a risk that the suspect may die of an overdose.
Dr Michael Knight, Honorary Secretary of the Association of Police Surgeons, said that although 132 intimate searches were carried out in 1996, the last year for which figures were available, far more would have been done if consent had not been an issue.
He suggested that one solution might be taking urine samples without consent - a procedure which would not require the presence of a doctor. However, the situation had reached "a classic impasse."
"I don't see any way forward. This isn't a theoretical business, it's a real business and I think any doctor or nurse who went against these guidelines would be running a grave risk," he said.
The BMA's guidelines to doctors say that searches should preferably be carried out by a police surgeon. If one is not available another doctor, a registered midwife or a registered nurse should be sought in that order.
Authorisation must be made by an officer of at least the rank of superintendent, and should normally be made in writing.
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments