I’d say when a doctor “instructs” to take your baby to the ER that you do so.

They were with a "doctor" at a college of medicine. The "doctor" did not make a medical diagnosis, he mentioned a concern. The "doctor" advised the parents to go to the ER, presumably another facility altogether (read on).

Why did the "doctor" release the patient to the parents rather than have the emergency patient transported to the ER if there was a "present danger" requiring "immediate attention?"

H/T: nolu chan

The Southwest College of Naturopathic Medicine & Health Sciences is the leading medical school dedicated to a comprehensive team approach to natural health.

Did you read that….it said “natural health” and dealing with possible meningitis is definitely not NATURAL HEALTH. This college did not have the equipment to test for meningitis. (read pm)

It is in some cases faster to drive to the ER than to call an ambulance. I know this from experience. Also I know 5hq5 calling an ambulance in Chandler and the surrounding area can cost as much as five thousand dollars. Sarah Beck and Brooks Bryce may not have had, or wanted to fork out, THOUSANDS of dollars for a few blocks ride in an ambulance when driving was much faster. (read on)

The doctor was an ND and not a MD trained in the diagnosis and treatment of meningitis.

The question remains unaddressed in why the couple did not go directly to the ER with a child having 105 degree temperature. Since they went directly to a ND I have the distinct they couple are true believers in Naturopathic Medicine. I am surprised the ND even instructed them to go to the ER. I believe he did so because of his deep concern about meningitis and

Another distinct possibility is that these people may be true believers in “natural medicine” and would never go to an ER. We don’t know. Do you even know what natural medicine is? Probably not. Here, let me educate you.

Natural medicine can also be referred to as naturopathy; it is a form of alternative medicine which involves homeopathy, herbalism, acupuncture, diet and lifestyle counselling, and more. It is thought that naturopathy originates back to 400BC and its founding principles were discovered by the Greek philosopher Hippocrates.

As Stone said earlier: “ I wonder if there is more to the story.”

From what I have learned so far, there definitely has been lots of information omitted, either by design of ignorance.

F/N: Gatlin

It is obvious this couple were true believers in “natural medicine” because they went to a ND in College of Naturopathic Medicine. I am here today to tell you if I have a child that a ND who definitely believes in the healing effects of natural medicine and probably teaches natural medicine at the college thinks for one second that my child may have meningitis and has no way of even testing for meningitis or treating meningitis instructs me to make my child to the ER….BAM, I am on my way très rapidement.

These believers in “natural medicine” did not go.

Yes, Stone, I believe there is MUCH more to this story.

The question remains unaddressed in why the couple did not go directly to the ER with a child having 105 degree temperature.

Once in her car, his mother retook his temperature and found it was going down.

"He's acting normal. He's dancing with his sisters in his car seat. And I take his temperature and it's 102," said Beck.

Later: "As I was on the phone with the officer I took his temperature, it was 100 degrees. There's no reason to give up my kids because he has a temperature of 100 degrees and sleeping," said Bryce.

Socialists Melissa Harris Perry (and Tater) - Children Belong to the Collective Not Parents or Families

The question remains unaddressed in why the couple did not go directly to the ER with a child having 105 degree temperature.

Once in her car, his mother retook his temperature and found it was going down.

"He's acting normal. He's dancing with his sisters in his car seat. And I take his temperature and it's 102," said Beck.

Later: "As I was on the phone with the officer I took his temperature, it was 100 degrees. There's no reason to give up my kids because he has a temperature of 100 degrees and sleeping," said Bryce.

And you believed this.

Sad ...

Later: "As I was on the phone with the officer I took his temperature, it was 100 degrees. There's no reason to give up my kids because he has a temperature of 100 degrees and sleeping," said Bryce.

And you believed this.

And you didn't?

It's a shame that your obsessive fetish for authority will only allow you to see this family as child abusers.

If the child had still had an abnormally high fever, I have no doubt that these parents would have gone to the emergency room

/s

It's a shame that your obsessive fetish for authority will only allow you to see this family as child abusers.

What I see is that DCS has been called to their house many times.

And the police report show there was vomit all over the kids room.

And the mother admitted that.

If it walks like a duck ...

And you believed this.

And you didn't?

Not from the beginning.

Not even from the same story on the other thread you posted.

The fact check always reveals the lies in the articles you post.

It's a shame that your obsessive fetish for authority will only allow you to see this family as child abusers.

It's a shame that your obsessive fetish for anarchy will only allow you to see this family as saints.

Thousands of children are killed at the hands of their parents, every year. Scumbag.

Thousands of children are killed at the hands of their parents, every year.

And here you are, on a chit-chat channel doing nothing at all.

So, kindly fuck off, BuckerGoo.

Are you watching your reflection in a mirror

Well, BuckerGoo, you can’t make it on a UFC fight card if you’re an over sensitized pussy... like Paultards and Dimrats.

In a MMA match, they ain’t all equal... and there’s no compassion for the loser. lol

Thousands of children are killed at the hands of their parents, every year.

your posts having over 50,000 rounds of ammunition preparing for some make-believe war.

He's going to need a hell of a lot more than that for confiscations from libertarians, like "Take the Guns First".

The Trumpkanista Canary gun grabbers are outnumbered, and out gunned.

lol

It was your Paultard buddies that first started to claim we are gonna collapse and a revolution would follow.

Your narrative is a problem. You make everything up as you can.

However, I do not think the end of anything will come during my lifetime... not even a collapse. However, I hope some situation develops where it’s legal for me to hunt snowflakes, welfare, illegals, drug addicts and libertarians.

Jimmy Jones

was bf - ing The unruly

he haTed To have To do iT

belize - guyana

aren'T They The same Thing

love
boris

Jim Jones

That’s right, Boris. Jim Jones ran off to the jungle because he too liked fucking his children. He was a government and cop hater too.

Sick twisted fucks, they are.

Good catch.

He figured his compound was as secluded as a jungle, if he refused to answer the door for 51 days.

lol

You can’t make it on a UFC fight card if you’re an over sensitized pussy...

In a MMA match, they ain’t all equal... and there’s no compassion for the loser.

Homo's gonna homo.

Have you noticed the correlation between grandchildren fuckers and government/cop haters?

Stone - is this the kind of perverted filth you want at your site?

I hope some situation develops where it’s legal for me to hunt snowflakes, welfare, illegals, drug addicts and libertarians.

Spoken like a true sociopath.

Good grief man, WTF is wrong with you?

Lots of government & cop hating folk do so because they are actively breaking laws. Dumb shit. Many flee the country to avoid detection, dumb shit. Many rape children or their own children, dip shit.

Jones and Keresh were two examples of seeking seclusion to avoid detection, dumb shit.

convincing Stone to ban all voices that aren’t anti cop, pro drugs.

Relax princess, no one wants to see you banned.

I'd be happy to see you start posting like a sane adult instead of of a drunk sociopath.

The doctor could not make a medical diagnosis because he did not have the equipment at the Southwest College of Naturopathic Medicine.

The extremely relevant point is that the N.D. could not make a diagnosis. He lacked competency to do so.

Given all the equipment he desired, was the N.D. licensed and competent to render a competent medical professional opinion of a positive or negative diagnosis of infectious meningitis? The answer appears clear that he was not.

The doctor was an ND and not a MD trained in the diagnosis and treatment of meningitis.

That's much better. The N.D. was not trained to diagnose meningitis. I would also doubt his medical competence to differentiate between the symptoms of bacterial or viral infection. The judge acted with zero competent evidence that there was any bacterial infection.

If a friend who had some medical knowledge, perhaps a former military corpman or medic, or an LPN expressed a belief that the child might have infectious meningitis, I should think that the parents should take the child to a competent medical professional.

However, that is not the question I address in this case. It is not a case of what the parents should have done, but whether the N.D. failed in his professional responsibilities, or the DCS, the police, or the judge failed in their responsibilities or exceeded their authority.

The question remains unaddressed in why the couple did not go directly to the ER with a child having 105 degree temperature. Since they went directly to a ND I have the distinct they couple are true believers in Naturopathic Medicine. I am surprised the ND even instructed them to go to the ER. I believe he did so because of his deep concern about meningitis

Notably absent from any recitation I have read so far is one syllable directly attributable to the N.D.

If the N.D. believed it was probable that the child had infectious meningitis, he should have notified the receiving hospital so they could be prepared to receive a suspected infectious meningitis case, and forwarded the medical record.

He should not have advised the parents to transport the child to some ER unannounced, there to plop in the waiting area to mix and mingle. The N.D. is without authority to order or instruct the parents that they must go to the ER.

As an N.D., he must know that his business is significantly an assembly of people who choose not to go to medical doctors. If he has a patient with a 105ºF temperature, how can he release said patient into the care of the parents??

The mother said the temperature went down to 102ºF on the ride home.

The mother said she called the N.D. in the afternoon and informed him the temperature had gone down.

The doctor, learning they had not gone to the ER, called DCS, and later that night, the family got a visit from Chandler police.

So the N.D. knew the parents had not gone to the ER that afternoon, but it became an undiagnosed medical emergency later that night.

After receiving the report from the doctor, DCS reached out to the parents to investigate. Brooks said that he spoke with a social worker and refused to take his son to the hospital. Brooks told AZ Family,

“They said ‘Brooks, you have to come out of your house right now… we have to check on them [kids],’ and I said, ‘I have Heber in my arms, he’s doing fine, his temperature is 100 degrees.

So, in the course of their nighttime investigation, DCS is outside his door telling him he must come out, and he says the child is fine and his temperature is 100 degrees.

Why didn't they force entry at that time?

After that,

Unable to convince the couple to take Heder to the hospital, DCS requested a temporary custody order from a judge.

What could they possibly tell the judge? They have a non-professional opinion that the child might have infectious meningitis?

Details from the police report:

-“there was a present danger [to the child] that required immediate medical attention”

-“Brooks and Sarah refused to come outside and refused to let DCS check on the welfare of [the child].”

-“There was a court order signed by the judge giving DCS temporary custody of [the child] in order to get him medical treatment.”

- - - - - - - - - -

-“there was a present danger [to the child] that required immediate medical attention”

How could these medical incompetents possibly swear to a judge that there affirmatively was a present danger, or that it required immediate medical attention? If so, they could have brought a doctor, or at least a quick read thermometer.

-“Brooks and Sarah refused to come outside and refused to let DCS check on the welfare of [the child].”

There is that little problem that they had no judge's order when they made their request. They requested the judge's order in response to that.

-“There was a court order signed by the judge giving DCS temporary custody of [the child] in order to get him medical treatment.”

What statement or medical record did they obtain from the naturopathic provider who was incompetent to render a competent professional medical opinion on whether the child did, or did not, have contagious meningitis, any other bacterial infection, or the flu.

Over on the other thread,

Officers went to the family's home to check the child's welfare, but no one answered the door, even though police could hear "someone coughing inside one of the bedrooms," according to the police report.

So, they concluded coughing means meningitis?

https://www.healthline.com/health/meningitis

Coughing does not appear to be a symptom of bacterial or other meningitis.

https://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/flu/symptoms-causes/syc-20351719

Dry, persistent cough; nasal congestion; and sore throat are symptoms of the flu, a viral infection.

So they broke in the door and,

Inside the home, the police say they found all three children sick and symptomatic.

That is worse than the DNC on spin cycle. The police found the children symptomatic. In their very best competent professional medical opinion, they found the children symptomatic of what? What exactly is their expertise in medical diagnostics?

After completing a search of the home, the police called for an ambulance. Two of the children were taken by ambulance to the hospital. A DCS worker took the third child to the hospital by car. The naturopath’s concerns were not unfounded. Doctors admitted Heder into the hospital to treat his symptoms.

Ph.D., piled higher and deeper?

There was absolutely no basis for the claim that the naturopath's concerns were unfounded.

If the naturopath's concerns, whatever they may have been, were well founded, why was only one child admitted?

According to the medical expertise indicated in the police report, all three of the children were found "symptomatic." What, one had more serious symptoms of contagious bacterial meningitis than the other two? Two symptomatic children could be released and not need isolation to protect the world from contagious infectious meningitis? And it appears the parents were not checked out for bugsies at all.

While doctors admitted Heder to treat his symptoms, that falls far short of stating Heder had contagious bacterial meningitis, or any bacterial infection at all. Maybe Heder was dehydrated and they hooked him up to a bag of fluids to treat his symptoms from the flu. What was his temperature at the house? What emergency care was given? What was the child's temperature at admittance? In any case, this information was not available when authorities requested, and the judge ordered the forced entry. One may not bootstrap information found after the fact to justify the order.

What evidence did the judge have that there was a medical emergency that night?

A veterinarian may be better qualified to diagnose a bacterial infection than anyone involved in this matter prior to arrrival at the hospital. Do the belated concerns of the N.D., on their own, justify the nighttime forced entry? What else did they have?

There is the alleged temperature of 105º attributed to a naturopath, at some unidentified time. The mother called the N.D. later, sometime in the afternoon. DCS showed up still later, that night. The father told the police, on the phone, the child's temperature was then 100º. Did they check the temperature with a quick read thermometer? It only takes seconds.

The question is whether there was a medical emergency at nighttime when requesting a judge to authorize a forced entry.

Did the N.D. call the receiving hospital and forward the medical record? If not, why not? I would bet the farm that the N.D. did not call the hospital, did not forward the medical record, and did not provide medical paperwork to the parents to take with them.

Did the judge speak to the N.D.?

Did the judge inquire and know that the doctor in question was an N.D., not an M.D.? Did the requesting authority make that known to the judge?

Did the requesting authority make known to the judge that the N.D. was incompetent to render a medical diagnosis of meningitis or bacterial infection, and that he did not make any such diagnosis?

Was the judge informed that the father just told the police that the child's temperature was 100°?

Quite simply, did they have sufficient competent information to make breaking down the door legal?

Did the requesting authority withhold relevant information? [Think FISA warrant.]

The judge and DCS and the N.D. may yet have some splainin' to do.

When those inside the house continued to refuse to open the door, police said, "The decision was made to force entry of the home for DCS in order to take custody of the child."

Another masterpiece of obfuscatory writing with the passive tense has the decision appear to have descended from the heavens. It is not attributed to any person or agency. The decision was an orphan that just appeared.

It is obvious this couple were true believers in “natural medicine” because they went to a ND in College of Naturopathic Medicine.

Was that obvious to the naturopathic doctor, or do you and I just have psychic abilities not apparent in the N.D.?

He allegedly had a child with a 105º fever. He delivered the child back into the care and custody of parents who were "true believers" in "natural medicine."

These believers in “natural medicine” did not go.

And why did he believe they would?

Later that day, did he develop a concern about the child or his license?

Assuming he had been correct in his incompetent non-professional suspicion, and the child died that night, how would he explain returning the child with the 105° fever to the care and custody of true believers in natural medicine?

It is obvious this couple were true believers in “natural medicine” because they went to a ND in College of Naturopathic Medicine.

It was “obvious” to me because with a child having a temperature of 105 (if information in the article is correct) and we don’t know of any other symptoms the child may have had, they went to a ND instead of the ER in Chandler.

Was that obvious to the naturopathic doctor …

… or do you and I just have psychic abilities not apparent in the N.D.?

Do you?

He allegedly had a child with a 105º fever. He delivered the child back into the care and custody of parents who were "true believers" in "natural medicine."

These believers in “natural medicine” did not go.

And why did he believe they would?

Later that day, did he develop a concern about the child or his license?

But it was reported that the mother called him later that day and told him she had not taken the child to the ER.

If that be true, I can readily assume that was “when” he “again” become concerned about the child.

And maybe also concern about his license.

I will add …

And also concern about the possibility of a lawsuit for malpractice.

Who knows?

Only that ND knows …

Another masterpiece of obfuscatory writing with the passive tense has the decision appear to have descended from the heavens. It is not attributed to any person or agency.

The decision was an orphan that just appeared.

I could take a couple stabs at the meaning or intended meaning.

But I’d rather not.

Another masterpiece of obfuscatory writing with the passive tense has the decision appear to have descended from the heavens. It is not attributed to any person or agency. The decision was an orphan that just appeared.

And the fawning media, busy fellating the jackbooted CPS and cops for their kidnapping under color of authority, never bother to point out just how shady and lawyerly these "official statements" really are.

It sounds like the authorities already know they did wrong and are perhaps withholding these children from their parents while they figure out a way to keep from getting their asses sued off in court.

Outstanding post, start to finish.

The doctor could not make a medical diagnosis because he did not have the equipment at the Southwest College of Naturopathic Medicine.

The extremely relevant point is that the N.D. could not make a diagnosis. He lacked competency to do so.

The doctor was REQUIIRED by LAW, as defined by ARS 13-3620 to report all concerns of child abuse or neglect.

You are much better at reading this stuff than I. Check the law. Does it say anything about a proper “diagnosis” or even “lacking the competency to do so?” I can find nowhere in the law that says it does. Maybe you can.

What I do find is this

[….]
12-3620. Duty to report abuse, physical injury, neglect and denial or deprivation of medical or surgical care or nourishment of minors; medical records; exception; violation; classification; definitions
[….]
1. Any physician, physician's assistant, optometrist, dentist, osteopath, chiropractor, podiatrist, behavioral health professional, nurse, psychologist, counselor or social worker who develops the reasonable belief in the course of treating a patient.
[….]

I find nowhere in the law that “reasonable belief” is defined. Maybe you can.

So, who decides “reasonable belief?”

Does the doctor decide that he has “reasonable belief” in order not to violate the law and face criminal charges if something terrible had happened to the child because he did not receive proper medical treatment?

Can we safely assume that the doctor is the one to decide that? Just asking.

ARS 13-3620

Given all the equipment he desired, was the N.D. licensed and competent to render a competent medical professional opinion of a positive or negative diagnosis of infectious meningitis? The answer appears clear that he was not.

But it is entirely irrelevant if I am reading the law correctly. And again, I say that you can read the law much better than I.

So you will need to show me that the law requires “the N.D. [to be] licensed and competent to render a competent medical professional opinion of a positive or negative diagnosis of infectious meningitis.”

I don’t find where that is required, What I find require is that which I have already stated…that the N.D. have “reasonable belief?”

Did he?

I don’t know. I can only assume that he did since he felt he must comply with ARS 13-3620.

Continuing on …

Where did you read the N.D. even made a “diagnosis of infectious meningitis?”

I never read that he did. I read that the mother only said he “mentioned” meningitis and I have no way of knowing in what context he used that if he did at all. If he did mention the word, what if any other words did he also mention as a “possibility” that the mother forgot to “mention” at her media interview?

So, what was neccery for the N.D. to have so that he MUST comply with ARS 13-3620.

… reasonable belief …

That’s what I see the law requires?

What do you see?

However, that is not the question I address in this case. It is not a case of what the parents should have done, but whether the N.D. failed in his professional responsibilities, or the DCS, the police, or the judge failed in their responsibilities or exceeded their authority.

However, staying on my point, I will continue to address the responsibilities of the N.D. and say that according to law all he needed to comply with ARS 13-3620 and notify CPS was reasonable belief.

And I would hope logically think that he had since he called them.

You have posed far too much for me to continue to "parse? your post.

I will be happy to address one specific item at at time, if you so choose to present one.

It is obvious this couple were true believers in “natural medicine” because they went to a ND in College of Naturopathic Medicine.

[#51] I have no idea what was obvious to the naturopathic doctor.

We know what is obvious to you, me, and most people of reasonable intelligence.

These believers in “natural medicine” did not go.

And why did he believe they would?

[52] That is a question that would need be asked of him.

If he were competent to determine it was an emergency medical situation and the child needed to go to a real doctor, he would have been professionally responsible to make sure it happened.

But then, the N.D. is not hot held medically competent, and is not required to even report negligence, even when he suspects negligence.

The decision was an orphan that just appeared.

[#54] I could take a couple stabs at the meaning or intended meaning.

But I’d rather not.

I'll try. Nobody wanted to take ownership of the decision after the fact.

It would appear that DCS obtained an order to take temporary custody of one child. It does not appear that anyone obtained a court order to search, seize, or force entry at 1 a.m. in the morning.

https://healthimpactnews.com/2019/police-break-down-door-of-arizona-family-at-1-am-to-medically-kidnap-3-children-because-parents-refused-to-take-child-to-emergency-room-with-fever/

March 4, 2019

by Brian Shilhavy
Editor, Health Impact News

[excerpts]

First of all, if there was imminent danger to the child, why did social workers and police wait until after midnight to go to the family’s home?

Secondly, if there was only a court order for the removal of one child, why did they take all three?

The mother reports that she had offered to return to the family doctor so the doctor could see for herself that the child was doing better.

The father reports that an emergency room visit would have cost them over $2500.

[...]

They still do not know where their children are located. When they showed up at a meeting with DCS, they were reportedly told that the agency “had to cancel the meeting.”

I believe the real problem is that the request to the judge is going to resemble a FISA request to spy on Trump associates. Exaggerated shit is in, and required relevant shit is deliberately left out. Based solely on the known facts, I see no way for a fully informed judge to grant an order to break down the door at one in the morning.

https://www.12news.com/article/news/local/valley/police-bust-into-chandler-home-remove-kids-after-clinic-reports-medical-emergency/75-887cff30-a00a-48a8-b890-0d207be735fc

He showed 12 News surveillance footage that captures Chandler PD pounding on his front door, saying they have a signed court order from DCS. The police report says the DCS investigator on scene got the order by a judge to give DCS temporary custody of their 2-year-old son, Heber, to get medically checked.

A short time later, police broke down their front door.

“Guns drawn, flashlights shining on me.. they saw me and asked me to put my hands up,” Bryce said.

He was handcuffed, while police checked on his kids. The family’s three kids were placed in DCS custody.

The police report says the decision to use forced entry was made because there was a present danger to the 2-year-old boy that required immediate medical attention.

The report also says police forced entry into the home because Beck and Bryce refused to come out and because DCS has a signed order by the judge.

The extremely relevant point is that the N.D. could not make a diagnosis. He lacked competency to do so.

No, the is not the “extremely [relevant] point.”

Yes, it is extremely relevant for a report of a "doctor" to indicate if he is not a competent medical doctor.

It is misleading to identify him as a doctor, rather than as a medically impompetent average joe.

A "concern" of a medical incompetent cannot be the judicial basis to declare a medical emergency and a forced entry.

What I do find is this

[….] 12-3620. Duty to report abuse, physical injury, neglect and denial or deprivation of medical or surgical care or nourishment of minors; medical records; exception; violation; classification; definitions [….] 1. Any physician, physician's assistant, optometrist, dentist, osteopath, chiropractor, podiatrist, behavioral health professional, nurse, psychologist, counselor or social worker who develops the reasonable belief in the course of treating a patient. [….]

… reasonable belief - reasonable belief - reasonable belief …

I find nowhere in the law that “reasonable belief” is defined. Maybe you can.

I do not find naturopath in the list of people with a reporting requiring requirement pursuant to Section A under its definition of "all persons" included within that subsection.

I also find Subsection F which applies to everyone not on that list.

[57] So you will need to show me that the law requires “the N.D. [to be] licensed and competent to render a competent medical professional opinion of a positive or negative diagnosis of infectious meningitis.”

I don’t find where that is required, What I find require is that which I have already stated…that the N.D. have “reasonable belief?”

Did he?

Did he what?

[57]

ARS 13-3620

[...]

So you will need to show me that the law requires “the N.D. [to be] licensed and competent to render a competent medical professional opinion of a positive or negative diagnosis of infectious meningitis.”

I don’t find where that is required, What I find require is that which I have already stated…that the N.D. have “reasonable belief?”

Did he?

I don’t know. I can only assume that he did since he felt he must comply with ARS 13-3620.

[...]

So, what was neccery for the N.D. to have so that he MUST comply with ARS 13-3620.

… reasonable belief …

That’s what I see the law requires?

What do you see?

Not what you see. Before presuming to tell me what ARS 13-3620 requires, I would recommend carefully reading it.

https://www.azleg.gov/ars/13/03620.htm

13-3620. Duty to report abuse, physical injury, neglect and denial or deprivation of medical or surgical care or nourishment of minors; medical records; exception; violation; classification; definitions

A. Any person who reasonably believes that a minor is or has been the victim of physical injury, abuse, child abuse, a reportable offense or neglect that appears to have been inflicted on the minor by other than accidental means or that is not explained by the available medical history as being accidental in nature or who reasonably believes there has been a denial or deprivation of necessary medical treatment or surgical care or nourishment with the intent to cause or allow the death of an infant who is protected under section 36-2281 shall immediately report or cause reports to be made of this information to a peace officer, to the department of child safety or to a tribal law enforcement or social services agency for any Indian minor who resides on an Indian reservation, except if the report concerns a person who does not have care, custody or control of the minor, the report shall be made to a peace officer only. A member of the clergy, a Christian Science practitioner or a priest who has received a confidential communication or a confession in that person's role as a member of the clergy, as a Christian Science practitioner or as a priest in the course of the discipline enjoined by the church to which the member of the clergy, the Christian Science practitioner or the priest belongs may withhold reporting of the communication or confession if the member of the clergy, the Christian Science practitioner or the priest determines that it is reasonable and necessary within the concepts of the religion. This exemption applies only to the communication or confession and not to personal observations the member of the clergy, the Christian Science practitioner or the priest may otherwise make of the minor. For the purposes of this subsection, "person" means:

1. Any physician, physician's assistant, optometrist, dentist, osteopath, chiropractor, podiatrist, behavioral health professional, nurse, psychologist, counselor or social worker who develops the reasonable belief in the course of treating a patient.

2. Any peace officer, child welfare investigator, child safety worker, member of the clergy, priest or Christian Science practitioner.

3. The parent, stepparent or guardian of the minor.

4. School personnel, domestic violence victim advocates or sexual assault victim advocates who develop the reasonable belief in the course of their employment.

5. Any other person who has responsibility for the care or treatment of the minor.

B. A report is not required under this section either:

1. For conduct prescribed by sections 13-1404 and 13-1405 if the conduct involves only minors who are fourteen, fifteen, sixteen or seventeen years of age and there is nothing to indicate that the conduct is other than consensual.

2. If a minor is of elementary school age, the physical injury occurs accidentally in the course of typical playground activity during a school day, occurs on the premises of the school that the minor attends and is reported to the legal parent or guardian of the minor and the school maintains a written record of the incident.

C. If a physician, psychologist or behavioral health professional receives a statement from a person other than a parent, stepparent, guardian or custodian of the minor during the course of providing sex offender treatment that is not court ordered or that does not occur while the offender is incarcerated in the state department of corrections or the department of juvenile corrections, the physician, psychologist or behavioral health professional may withhold the reporting of that statement if the physician, psychologist or behavioral health professional determines it is reasonable and necessary to accomplish the purposes of the treatment.

D. Reports shall be made immediately either electronically or by telephone. The reports shall contain the following information, if known:

1. The names and addresses of the minor and the minor's parents or the person or persons having custody of the minor.

2. The minor's age and the nature and extent of the minor's abuse, child abuse, physical injury or neglect, including any evidence of previous abuse, child abuse, physical injury or neglect.

3. Any other information that the person believes might be helpful in establishing the cause of the abuse, child abuse, physical injury or neglect.

E. A health care professional who is regulated pursuant to title 32 and who, after a routine newborn physical assessment of a newborn infant's health status or following notification of positive toxicology screens of a newborn infant, reasonably believes that the newborn infant may be affected by the presence of alcohol or a drug listed in section 13-3401 shall immediately report this information, or cause a report to be made, to the department of child safety. For the purposes of this subsection, "newborn infant" means a newborn infant who is under thirty days of age.

F. Any person other than one required to report or cause reports to be made under subsection A of this section who reasonably believes that a minor is or has been a victim of abuse, child abuse, physical injury, a reportable offense or neglect may report the information to a peace officer or to the department of child safety, except if the report concerns a person who does not have care, custody or control of the minor, the report shall be made to a peace officer only.

G. A person who has custody or control of medical records of a minor for whom a report is required or authorized under this section shall make the records, or a copy of the records, available to a peace officer, child welfare investigator or child safety worker investigating the minor's neglect, child abuse, physical injury or abuse on written request for the records signed by the peace officer, child welfare investigator or child safety worker. Records disclosed pursuant to this subsection are confidential and may be used only in a judicial or administrative proceeding or investigation resulting from a report required or authorized under this section.

H. When reports are received by a peace officer, the officer shall immediately notify the department of child safety. Notwithstanding any other statute, when the department receives these reports, it shall immediately notify a peace officer in the appropriate jurisdiction.

I. Any person who is required to receive reports pursuant to subsection A of this section may take or cause to be taken photographs of the minor and the vicinity involved. Medical examinations of the involved minor may be performed.

J. A person who furnishes a report, information or records required or authorized under this section, or a person who participates in a judicial or administrative proceeding or investigation resulting from a report, information or records required or authorized under this section, is immune from any civil or criminal liability by reason of that action unless the person acted with malice or unless the person has been charged with or is suspected of abusing or neglecting the child or children in question.

K. Except for the attorney client privilege or the privilege under subsection L of this section, no privilege applies to any:

1. Civil or criminal litigation or administrative proceeding in which a minor's neglect, dependency, abuse, child abuse, physical injury or abandonment is an issue.

2. Judicial or administrative proceeding resulting from a report, information or records submitted pursuant to this section.

3. Investigation of a minor's child abuse, physical injury, neglect or abuse conducted by a peace officer or the department of child safety.

L. In any civil or criminal litigation in which a child's neglect, dependency, physical injury, abuse, child abuse or abandonment is an issue, a member of the clergy, a Christian Science practitioner or a priest shall not, without his consent, be examined as a witness concerning any confession made to him in his role as a member of the clergy, a Christian Science practitioner or a priest in the course of the discipline enjoined by the church to which he belongs. This subsection does not discharge a member of the clergy, a Christian Science practitioner or a priest from the duty to report pursuant to subsection A of this section.

M. If psychiatric records are requested pursuant to subsection G of this section, the custodian of the records shall notify the attending psychiatrist, who may excise from the records, before they are made available:

1. Personal information about individuals other than the patient.

2. Information regarding specific diagnosis or treatment of a psychiatric condition, if the attending psychiatrist certifies in writing that release of the information would be detrimental to the patient's health or treatment.

N. If any portion of a psychiatric record is excised pursuant to subsection M of this section, a court, on application of a peace officer, child welfare investigator or child safety worker, may order that the entire record or any portion of the record that contains information relevant to the reported abuse, child abuse, physical injury or neglect be made available to the peace officer, child welfare investigator or child safety worker investigating the abuse, child abuse, physical injury or neglect.

O. A person who violates this section is guilty of a class 1 misdemeanor, except if the failure to report involves a reportable offense, the person is guilty of a class 6 felony.

P. For the purposes of this section:

1. "Abuse" has the same meaning prescribed in section 8-201.

2. "Child abuse" means child abuse pursuant to section 13-3623.

3. "Neglect" has the same meaning prescribed in section 8-201.

4. "Reportable offense" means any of the following:

(a) Any offense listed in chapters 14 and 35.1 of this title or section 13-3506.01.

(b) Surreptitious photographing, videotaping, filming or digitally recording or viewing a minor pursuant to section 13-3019.

(c) Child sex trafficking pursuant to section 13-3212.

(d) Incest pursuant to section 13-3608.

(e) Unlawful mutilation pursuant to section 13-1214.

As Arizona 13-3620. Duty to report abuse, physical injury, neglect and denial or deprivation of medical or surgical care or nourishment of minors; medical records; exception; violation; classification; definitions," makes excruciatingly clear, "any person" as used in the reporting requirement section means:

Any physician,
physician's assistant,
optometrist,
dentist,
osteopath,
chiropractor,
podiatrist,
behavioral health professional,
nurse,
psychologist,
counselor or social worker

who develops the reasonable belief in the course of treating a patient.

That list does not include witch doctors, veterinarians, or naturopaths.

However, for those required to make a report, they "shall immediately report or cause reports to be made."

Witch doctors, veterinarians, naturopaths and garbage collectors would fall under subsection F, not subsection A.

F. Any person other than one required to report or cause reports to be made under subsection A of this section who reasonably believes that a minor is or has been a victim of abuse, child abuse, physical injury, a reportable offense or neglect may report the information to a peace officer or to the department of child safety, except if the report concerns a person who does not have care, custody or control of the minor, the report shall be made to a peace officer only.

As a medical incompetent, the N.D. may report the information of his suspicion of neglect.

His suspicion alone is not sufficient to establish any medical diagnosis.

A court order enabling a health and welfare check is not a court order enabling a visit with a SWAT team and forced entry at 1 a.m. in the morning, nor is it a declaration of a medical emergency.

[58] I will not addres the aspects of concerning whether the DCS, the police, or the judge failed in their responsibilities or exceeded their authority. I can do so only after I have all available information concerning this situation.

These are the most relevant points on the thread. Was there legally sufficient information to a judge to break down the door at 1 in the morning?

Far less relevant are the medical abilities and reporting requirements of the witch doctor. The N.D. could have had a Ph.d. in basket weaving and it would have made little difference.

[58] However, staying on my point, I will continue to address the responsibilities of the N.D. and say that according to law all he needed to comply with ARS 13-3620 and notify CPS was reasonable belief.

For your convenience, I provided a copy of ARS 13-3620 so you can read it and ascertain that the N.D. did not have a reporting requirement.

He is not medically competent to be burdened with that reporting requirement.