February 1, 1977

Mr. Leon J. Vander Linden 
Day County State's Attorney 
Webster, South Dakota 57274

Official Opinion No. 77-18

Whether doctors on the staff of a county hospital are obligated to admit intoxicated persons

Dear Mr. Vander Linden:

You have requested an opinion from this office based upon the following facts:

FACTS: 

Day County owns and operates a county hospital under the laws of South Dakota.  There is a medical staff of four doctors who reside in Webster, South Dakota, and are on the staff of the Day County Hospital.  These staff doctors are concerned about people who are brought to Day County Hospital for treatment and admission to the hospital who are under the influence of alcoholic liquors.  These people are brought there by law enforcement officers such as city police, South Dakota Highway Patrolmen, and local sheriff's officers. 
    
As you know, in the past these people have probably been charged with public intoxication and placed in custody.  Since public intoxication is no longer a crime, the officer brings these intoxicated persons to the Day County Hospital.

Based on the above facts, you have asked:

QUESTION: 

Are the doctors on the staff of the Day County Hospital obligated under the laws of the State of South Dakota to admit these intoxicated people to the Day County Hospital?

SDCL 34-20A-55 provides: 
    
A person who appears to be intoxicated in a public place and to be in need of help, may be assisted to his home, or may be taken into protective custody by the police and taken forthwith to an approved public treatment facility. If no approved public treatment facility is readily available he shall be taken to an emergency medical service which shall include any facility with the capability to provide basic health care or which is customarily used for incapacitated persons including a jail which complies with the rules promulgated by the board of charities and corrections pursuant to §  24-11-23.

From the fact situation presented, I presume that Day County Hospital is not an approved public treatment facility as defined in Chapter 34-20A and referred to in the above-cited statute.  I further assume that the authority under which the intoxicated persons are brought to the hospital is SDCL 34-20A-55 cited above.

In my opinion, there is no legal requirement that an emergency medical service facility, such as Day County Hospital, must accept intoxicated persons who are brought to the hospital by the police. When public intoxication was decriminalized and the present statutory provisions enacted, I believe it was contemplated that emergency medical services would accept such persons as a last resort.  If there are no approved public treatment or private treatment facilities, and there is no facility such as a county jail which complies with the requirements of SDCL 34-20A-55, then the only option is to take the intoxicated person to an emergency medical service or assist him to his home. In many instances, this may not be much of a choice and it may put emergency medical service facilities such as Day County Hospital in a difficult position.  I do not believe, however, that the law requires that such emergency medical service facilities accept intoxicated persons.

An added consideration in this matter is the effect of Hill-Burton Laws and Regulations.  If the Day County Hospital has been a recipient of Hill-Burton funds, there are requirements which the hospital must follow with respect to admissions.  Without knowing more about which of the three alternatives the Day County Hospital may be operating under, I cannot give a detailed analysis of what effect the regulations would have.

Respectfully submitted,

William J. Janklow
Attorney General

WJJ:DOC:mhb