Imagine you are laying in intensive care in a New York City hospital awaiting a life-saving heart transplant. Without the transplant, you will die. Now imagine a donor heart becomes available; it is flown in by helicopter as the members of your transplant team are notified to head to the hospital. The problem is, the surgeons and other specialists are not permitted to utilize red emergency lights or disobey certain traffic laws to speed their trip to the hospital even though your life hangs in the balance.
One would think that if an officer pulled over a surgeon for speeding on his or her way to a hospital for a medical emergency that the officer would escort the doctor to the hospital. Indeed, officers are taught that preserving life is always their first priority. Unfortunately, I have heard far too many complaints from doctors pulled over for speeding on their way to an emergency who, instead of receiving an escort from the officer, were delayed while the officer wrote a speeding ticket. Something is very wrong with a system that rightfully allows the Emergency Medical Technicians (paramedics) who drive the ambulance the dying patient is in to disregard certain traffic laws and regulations (VTL 1104) but does not extend the same privileges to the doctor who will perform those life saving procedures. Indeed, even sanitation patrol vehicles may disregard certain traffic laws and utilize emergency lighting and sirens. In other words, glorified garbage men have more priority than doctors in route to save a life. (See VTL 101 & 1104).
However, there might be legal way to classify a doctor’s vehicle as an authorized emergency vehicle thus allowing him or her to disregard certain traffic rules and regulation and to also utilize red emergency lighting. In People v. Levy, 188 Misc.2d 103, 727 N.Y.S.2d 248 (2001), the Appellate Term for the Second Department held that a volunteer ambulance service member’s vehicle qualified as “emergency ambulance service vehicle” as defined in VTL 101 because the defendant produced uncontroverted proof that the vehicle was affiliated with a volunteer ambulance service. Specifically, the defendant produced a dashboard placard showing that his vehicle was affiliated with a local private ambulance service.