I agree that it appears they should, but again recall this happened in Arizona. I personally have spoken with their board. They personally have expressed to m

I agree that it appears they should, but again recall this happened in Arizona. I personally have spoken with their board. They personally have expressed to me that it isn't even against the regulatory bounds of the license of medical professionals to act without consent. They refuse to even _investigate_ acts that happen under detainment without consent by a patient who was fully alert and oriented without any emergent condition. That is, there is zero effect to the license of anyone doing it as the board refuses to act on it in the state this article is in. The claims simply die in triage -- and this isn't some theoretical but my concrete experience. >The state medical board is the wrong forum for that complaint. The complaints I made to medical board was about medical staff at a private hospital acting without consent. I was even sent the bill this wasn't a prison or other state hospital. Why would the board be an inappropriate forum? I understand the board doesn't control actual police officers but they were not the direct subject of the complaint. >he legal issue isn’t medical And this is the problem I keep confronting to try and solve this situation. If you argue it was medically improper, suddenly it was a "criminal search and you need to hold accountable the process for the criminal search." If you argue it was an improper search, suddenly it was "medical care and you need to determine if the medical care was improper." This allows both the LEO and medical personnel to weasel out of it by flipping things to the other side, which is part of the reason why it is probably done this way as a slippery "be medical when you argue against the criminal aspect and be criminal search when you argue against the medical aspect." I know the game being played with that card because it gets played a lot.