My brother was a volunteer firefighter in our hometown for many years. He once told me a story about a man who drove through three consecutive red lights, causing accidents at each light, yet continuing on. At the third light, his car finally came to a stop, and the largely-volunteer fire and rescue squad found themselves treating the injured at three simultanous accident scenes.
They were, understandably, absolutely livid with the driver. It was just after lunch on a pleasant Friday afternoon, and he was completely loopy. Uninjured and seemingly unaware of the havoc he'd just caused, the driver was assumed to be drunk.
Once they got close enough to the driver, someone spotted his medical ID, and they realized he was not a drunken asshole, but a man with diabetes who needed assistance. Until that moment, though, he was the person responsible for causing three accidents and injuring several other people. He was a man in control of a half ton vehicle, with the potential to take off and cause further harm.
I thought of this story as I read Doug Burns' tale earlier this week.
I thought about the fact that I hang out with people with diabetes - and have for over twenty years now - and I've only ever actually seen one truly combative insulin reaction. I've seen blank looks on faces, quiet people who are overly-giddy, and chatty people who are unusually quiet. But I've never felt threatened by someone having a low blood sugar. And that's not because I know diabetes and understand lows, that's because its a pretty rare experience.
I would guess that the security guard at a movie theater has seen hundreds of drunk and/or high people stroll into his theater. And I imagine that the police officers who responded to the theater's call for help were pre-disposed to think that the man trying to re-gain entrance to the theater was, in fact, strung out. Regardless of what he was wearing, or how 'normal' he looked. Their reality - the experience and training of police and security personnel - led them to respond in the manner that they did.
It's horrible that things panned out that way. If only Burns had known that the new diabetes drug (symlin, I'm guessing?) could possibly cause a more severe low, and packed extra glucose before leaving the house. If only the security guard had thought "this man needs help" before he thought "this guy's drunk". If only the officers had spotted the medical ID bracelet sooner. Perhaps then, things would have played out differently.
Was Burns a threat? Was it reasonable that, until the ID bracelet and wallet info was uncovered, the officers perceived him as a threat? He wasn't just lying on the ground, semi-conscious, he was trying to get back into the theater. The officers, who will see a thousand drunks for every one combative hypoglycemic person they encounter, had to make decisions, and quickly.
If I'd been there with my kids, and a muscular, combative, apparently intoxicated man was trying to gain access to the theater, would I have been afraid for us? Maybe. I'd like to think I would have given him the benefit of the doubt, but I'll never really know for sure.
If there is work to be done, I think it should focus on everything that happened after the moment the EMTs identified Burns as having diabetes. A mistake was made, one that could theoretically have been avoided. But there's nothing theoretical about the ignorance and foolishness that followed. Start with "Sorry", officers, and know enough about diabetes to realize that Burns' actions were beyond his control, and that he meant no harm.
