I believe that the hospital is within it's rights to do what can be done to determine the culprit and there are a couple of reasons why. One is
because of the property damage and also because the person who would do such a thing probably shouldn't be working in a hospital.
I can see the testing being useful to discover which orderly has been raping the comatose woman in bed nine, or whatever, but to discover the origin
of urine in a toolbox? Perhaps the solution will be to require DNA samples from anyone working in a medical environment.
But it can't possibly end there, can it?
I would be inclined to leave my job in the hospital before submitting, but maybe that's just me. Have they drug tested the urine, I wonder? Could
that be an unspoken element in the hospital's decision?
What the employees should do, in my opinion, is refuse. If they are terminated, they should seek unemployment, and demand a hearing. They'll win,
I also believe that there is a way to limit the amount of information gained from the DNA sample and to insure that samples are destroyed once their
use in the investigation is finished. A chain of custody is always involved in such matters just for the sake of controlling for the abuse of
I'm afraid this genie doesn't go back in the bottle. The chain of custody has a habit of breaking down, have you noticed? Human institutions seem
a lot like machines, the more components prone to failure, the higher your chance for a catastrophic, sequential breakdown.
Better to avoid all that inefficiency and potential disaster by simply drawing the line at workplace DNA testing. : shrug : I think employers should
hire trustworthy and responsible employees to insure against pissed-in toolboxes and other atrocities.
I was reading earlier about a former prison guard with three live in girlfriends, who shot and killed 13 people in 1982, including seven of his own
children I think. Who's hiring these people?
I don't know why employers feel it's their right to peek inside our bodies and analyze the contents of our blood or urine or whatever else. Either
hire me or don't, but if you start wanting to probe me as a condition of employment, I'll find employment elsewhere, thank you very much. These
practices wouldn't stand if people weren't desperate for work. (Strangely enough, most businesses are starving for competent employees at the same
If the cops wanted to investigate the incident, they would have been within their rights to investigate using DNA, right? I'm sure they have better
things to do, which is something the hospital ought to think about for a second. This is going to be an expensive witch hunt, and all for nothing if
my instincts are correct.
Bottom line, what sort of moron spends 25 thousand dollars investigating a pissed-in toolbox? How big was this toolbox anyway? How expensive were
the tools; was he sportin' a bunch of 500 dollar designer screwdrivers with ebony handles? For cryin' out loud, I understand it's a hospital
environment, but it's not like anyone's pissed on the patients.
I too have a toolbox, and if I came back from vacation to find someone had pissed in it, I'd be pretty mad. Okay, really mad. But I wouldn't start
demanding DNA tests from my neighbors! I'd analyze my own behavior to figure out what I could do in the future to prevent a recurrence (attitude,
security, etc.). Why? Because that's the only measure with a reasonable chance of success.