Tasers, Pepper Spray, and Attack Dogs...Has hospital security gone TOO far?

RN1982 · Nov 9, 2009

The hospital I work at has recently updated its security department. Newest to the line of defense is the use of Tasers. I am spilt on this issue. Tasers used on aggressive visitors (and Management, lol) I support. Not on the use of patients.
What is you opinion?

Darling, the security where I work carry guns and for good reason, they've had shoot outs with gang members. All security officers are off-duty police officers. Tasers and attack dogs are just a walk in the park and I support the use of dogs and tasers.

Apollos · Nov 10, 2009

Count me firmly among the fence riders on this one. Guess it depends a lot on location. It would be serious overkill at my facility, but in areas with a higher incidence of violent crime, I can imagine how it might be needed. But I think you'd want officers to be highly trained, with a lot of discipline.
I've seen a few instances at my facility where I thought one or another security officer had too much of a "law enforcement" mentality. I was an unlicensed sitter with a patient having a psychiatric crisis who bolted several times. I was grateful to have security help me bring him back, but one officer made some comments to the patient that I found inappropriate. At the time, I wasn't sure how to react, but as a nurse, I would feel bound to correct the officer. I wish I had said something at the time. Still, it was, at worst, verbal abuse, and I wouldn't even really call it that. Just untherapeutic.
Still, there have been times I have personally called security to assist with an agressive patient and asked that they send 3-4 guys. As much as I prefer to talk a patient down, there are times when overwhelming force is safer for all concerned--especially the patient himself. The last thing you want is a fair fight. No fight at all is best, but short and decisive is the best ending when physical force can't be avoided.
So...tasers, huh? Sounds extreme, but there are environments where people come in with guns or knives. Which raises the worry that an officer with a taser might feel too brave. In the particular case I'm thinking of where three guards, another male nurse, and I, put a patient in bed and tied him down, no one was at much risk. If they had sent one officer with a taser, it could have gotten ugly. And I'd hate to be the one asking an officer with a taser take on an assailant with a gun. Seems like in that instance, it would be more prudent to get the innocent people out of harm's way and let the actual police handle the gunman.
In short, I don't know. I guess it depends a lot on the situation. And the officer. Most of the ones where I work seem to understand why they are there.

Thanks for the input Mike. I think you have a fundamental misunderstanding of all things security though. Allow me to elaborate:

First, I agree completely that some security officers have too much of a LEO mentality. Keep in mind, however, that these are men and women that often face the same threats as LE without any weapons to defend themselves with. And they have families too. If they seem hard, on edge, or pinging a little, its probably for good reason.

Regarding tasers: Perhaps no tool in the security/law enforcement world is subject to more misconceptions, falsehoods, and general speculation than the taser. It is a high-profile too, no doubt, and it is supremely effective in its intended role. The perception, somehow, is that one officer with a taser, who tases a patient, is somehow more dangerous than four officers going into a melee with the same patient. I can tell you from personal experience that there is not a lot of order involved when 4, 5, or 6 security officers enter a room to take down a patient. The objective is control, and quickly, which can unfortunately translate into some kind of injury. The addition of drugs and alcohol in the patient's system only exacerbate the underlying cause.

Essentially, one officer with a taser, in my humble opinion, is preferable to four going hands-on with an individual. Further, tasers have been around long enough that the average street thug knows (and fears) them. The red dot, in most instances, is enough to put somebody back in bed, thus avoiding any incident at all.

Finally...if you are working the ER and some psychotic individual walks in with a gun, will you wish your security staff had tasers? At least? I know I would. Don't be a hero and try to talk that guy down. If he has lost it enough to walk into a hospital with the intent to kill, let the trained security staff respond with the appropriate tools and do work.

nursemike, ASN, RN · Nov 10, 2009

Thanks for the input Mike. I think you have a fundamental misunderstanding of all things security though. Allow me to elaborate:
First, I agree completely that some security officers have too much of a LEO mentality. Keep in mind, however, that these are men and women that often face the same threats as LE without any weapons to defend themselves with. And they have families too. If they seem hard, on edge, or pinging a little, its probably for good reason.
Regarding tasers: Perhaps no tool in the security/law enforcement world is subject to more misconceptions, falsehoods, and general speculation than the taser. It is a high-profile too, no doubt, and it is supremely effective in its intended role. The perception, somehow, is that one officer with a taser, who tases a patient, is somehow more dangerous than four officers going into a melee with the same patient. I can tell you from personal experience that there is not a lot of order involved when 4, 5, or 6 security officers enter a room to take down a patient. The objective is control, and quickly, which can unfortunately translate into some kind of injury. The addition of drugs and alcohol in the patient's system only exacerbate the underlying cause.
Essentially, one officer with a taser, in my humble opinion, is preferable to four going hands-on with an individual. Further, tasers have been around long enough that the average street thug knows (and fears) them. The red dot, in most instances, is enough to put somebody back in bed, thus avoiding any incident at all.
Finally...if you are working the ER and some psychotic individual walks in with a gun, will you wish your security staff had tasers? At least? I know I would. Don't be a hero and try to talk that guy down. If he has lost it enough to walk into a hospital with the intent to kill, let the trained security staff respond with the appropriate tools and do work.

In the facility where I've worked for 11 years, there has been one instance of a person on the premises with a gun, other than authorized guards accompanying inmates. An off-duty employee, it turns out, was selling a rifle to a co-worker and brought it to the workplace to deliver it to the purchaser. Had everyone a tad excited, I can tell you.

And just to reiterate, I'm not opposed to security. I happen to like feeling secure. And I realize living in one of the lowest crime-rate areas in the country gives me a different perspective. ( A friend of mine and I were once speculating why. My theory was that a lot of people in WV don't have much worth stealing. My friend said it was because everybody owns 6-10 guns. We finally decided we were both right: many of our neighbors have most of their net worth in their gun cabinets. That's not really true, but it isn't entirely untrue, either.) So I can't fairly judge whether armed security might be appropriate in some settings.

I've worked where I work long enough to know most of our security officers by sight, and a few by name. They're okay. I recall an incident where a patient with psych issues was threatening to urinate on one of the nurses and one of the aides on my floor. I was an orderly, then, I think. Anyway, I tried to calm him and wasn't having a lot of success. Security showed up and he said, "Well, I know how this goes." and immediately complied. Nice. I can relate a couple of cases where I think security acted somewhat inappropriately, but not grossly so. I understand that their concerns are not identical to mine, but I don't think any of them want to hurt anybody. As a nurse, my focus is likely to be first on keeping the "perpetrator" safe, plus protecting everyone around him--other patients, co-workers, myself. And I'm not outraged to think security may be more oriented to keeping other patients, my co-workers, me, and themselves safe, plus the "perpetrator." For me, that means I just don't call security if I don't have to.

Finally, I think it's important to be clear that distinguishing between hospital security and law enforcement is not to say hospital security is a lesser role. It isn't. Some of the comments on this thread have focused on wrong-doers coming in off the street, and that's a valid concern. We have things on our premises that some people want badly enough to steal. People wind up in the ED after violent altercations, and the altercations don't always end there. Sometimes alert and oriented patients abuse staff. But a lot of security's interaction with the public is telling people where they can't park, or can't smoke, or just giving directions, and it's nice if they can put a happy face on those interactions. Sometimes, though, they need to control someone we're trying to help, and that's both more complicated and more critical than maintaining order. Ideally, I think civil police should be trained to understand dealing with the mentally ill, to recognize hypoglycemic vs. drunk, to de-escalate any confrontation they can. I don't really know, but I imagine they do get some instruction in that sort of thing. But for hospital security, cases like that are the rule, not the exception. Most of my patients are not criminals, but some of them do behave in erratic and unreasonable ways. We all need to realize, they're still patients.

DogWmn · Nov 10, 2009

Saftey of Staff and Patients is top priority in my book. Years ago (1980) pre-security (1 sleepy retired cop doesn't count), I worked in an inner-city knife and gun club hospital ICU nights, we had numerous incidents, one was me getting a gun pointed at me by someone looking to "finish the job" fortunately, he was too drunk and drugged and when he turned his back we (we being me and two nuns) attacked him. He was admitted with broken ribs, concussion, and a really really bad case of epididymo-orchitis. The nuns were a bit :imbar and I was like you don't pay me enough.

So I'm all for security and what ever works.

Otessa, BSN, RN · Nov 10, 2009

The hospital I work at has recently updated its security department. Newest to the line of defense is the use of Tasers. I am spilt on this issue. Tasers used on aggressive visitors (and Management, lol) I support. Not on the use of patients.
What is you opinion?

If someone is going to harm me, not matter who, I will protect myself-no discrimination for who. Security having these options is a plus IMO.

otessa

PeachPie · Nov 10, 2009

I have always found it disgusting that banks have better security than we do, and I vehemently agree that retired old cops aren't going to cut it. People are allowed to get away with too much, and nurses are not safe or respected. Awww are you suffering "mental anguish" because a big burly guy yelled at and restrained you after you slapped a nurse? Tough cookies, if you can't pay the time, don't do the crime.

Apollos · Nov 11, 2009

I have always found it disgusting that banks have better security than we do, and I vehemently agree that retired old cops aren't going to cut it. People are allowed to get away with too much, and nurses are not safe or respected. Awww are you suffering "mental anguish" because a big burly guy yelled at and restrained you after you slapped a nurse? Tough cookies, if you can't pay the time, don't do the crime.

I wish more nurses had your mentality! :yeah:

Guest219794 · Nov 11, 2009

The hospital I work at has recently updated its security department. Newest to the line of defense is the use of Tasers. I am spilt on this issue. Tasers used on aggressive visitors (and Management, lol) I support. Not on the use of patients.
What is you opinion?

Why distinguish patients? The question is the level of threat created by an individual, and the best way to protect staff and bystanders. Whether they are patient, visitor, staff, or delivery driver is irrelevant.

I agree with others that priority is on having good staff with good training, and then giving them the best tools to do the job.

I recently had a violent patient, and in addition to security, had a couple of large armed police officers. One covered him with a taser, one covered him with pepper spray as he changed and lay on the bed. Amazingly, he was psychotic enough to believe that aliens in the TV were telling him to attack people, but with it enough to understand how much his world was going to suck if he got violent.

After the drugs kicked in, I was able to release him, one limb at a time. the treatment was in the best interest of the patient, and nobody got hurt.

BTW- thumbs up on Tasers, but that pepper spray makes my eyes burn.