Longview Weather
79°F
Severe
Full Forecaste

Past Month's Most Commented Stories

Home > Breaking News

Portland officer faces firing for lying about surgery

Tuesday, July 22, 2008 12:17 PM PDT

By The Associated Press

Font Size:
 
 

PORTLAND — A Portland police officer may be fired for lying about weight loss surgery despite privacy protection for medical procedures.

Officer Christina Nelson claimed she was having gallbladder surgery because she didn’t want other officers to know about her stomach-band surgery.

A police emergency fund awarded Nelson $1,000 to help cover costs for gallbladder surgery after an employee assistance program staffer asked her about it over the phone.

Chief Rosie Sizer has recommended firing Nelson for untruthfulness. But Nelson never signed the form for the $1,000 award, and the special fund doesn’t require officers to reveal medical information.

The Multnomah County district attorney’s office has declined to prosecute because Nelson didn’t sign any paper making a false statement.

But Mayor Tom Potter has signed a termination order to fire Nelson.

Previous Next

jibjab123 wrote on Jul 22, 2008 8:11 AM:

" How is it that somebody that needs that kind of surgery can pass the physical fitness test become an officer anyways? "

angel wrote on Jul 22, 2008 8:16 AM:

" Who cares what her surgery was for? Does it have any effect on how she does her job? I would hate to be in a job that required me to give all medical/personal information at all times. Maybe she just didn't want to deal with the questions if she told the true reason for surgery. Did she request the $1000.00 money? She didn't recieve it so leave it alone. "

Rural Citizen wrote on Jul 22, 2008 9:26 AM:

" I smell a handsome lawsuit. "

viper wrote on Jul 22, 2008 10:12 AM:

" Sue tom potter personally and the city of portland the procuting attorney knows to leave it alone why can't tom potter ? what medical problems an employee has as long as it does not interfear with there job is none of there business, talk about invasion of privacy !great case for an ambulance chaser : Viper "

kelso mom1 wrote on Jul 22, 2008 10:21 AM:

" "It doesn't matter what kind of surgery she had, she never received any kind of funds, so I say, leave the lady alone." She did this on her own time, it was noone else's business not even Chief Rosie Sizer, or Mayor Tom Potter. If you do fire her, I hope she SUE's the pants off of you. lol. "

KelsoLesbian wrote on Jul 22, 2008 10:38 AM:

" This is BS. Leave the cop alone. She has the right to privacy just like the rest of us. "

Girth VonPhister wrote on Jul 22, 2008 11:15 AM:

" Police officers must be above reproach. If she lied about the surgery, she lacks the integrity that the job requires. She should have been truthful in the beginning. But she will probably hire a blood-sucking lawyer and sue. And we taxpayers will foot the bill. "

Im_not_saying wrote on Jul 22, 2008 12:18 PM:

" Girth - There are federal laws that provide you, the officer, and I privacy in medical matters. No one needs to tell their employer WHY they are sick, No matter what the boss says. She wanted privacy in this matter and was not given it. Now that it has been released to the media, I bet the officer is talking to an attorney this very minute. She lied to protect her privacy - True, she should have said she was just going to have surgery. Her bosses could not ask for any more information than that. But by invading her privacy about the matter, the department and the city are in the wrong. So yes, she will sue, settle out of court and PORTLAND will foot the bill, by way of higher premiums as long as Potter and Sizer are in charge. I think violating a persons rights and federal law are a lot more serious than a white lie to protect an officers personal privacy. Sizer should be canned and Potter should be removed from office. "

longview citizen wrote on Jul 22, 2008 12:47 PM:

" Once again we have an issue of right to privacy. This officer however blew it when she informed folks questioning her it was for gall bladder surgery she should have stated I would rather not discuss it. As far as the $1000.00 dollar assistance yes she did recieve it and disclose she was having gall bladder surgery but that is strictly her word against the callers word. And should not the person who called be reprimanded for not following procedure and having the proper document signed. This will end in a lawsuit and she will probably win. "

my2cents wrote on Jul 22, 2008 2:01 PM:

" What a load! I completely agree with Longview Citizen, couldn't have said it better. But lap band surgery is a very personal choice and any time it is brought up, everyone thinks it's fair game to blast the person with their opinion (often based on erroneous info) and judgements of people who choose weight loss surgery. It is no wonder this officer chose to not disclose her band surgery. Lap band surgery in no way affects her ability to perform her job. If anything, it would help her improve her overall fitness level to do her job better. I can think of many LE officers who could use a bit of weight loss help. Her choice to have this surgery is absolutely nobody's business and her misguided notion to pass it off as gallbladder surgery is understandable and may deserve some sort of discipline, but is in no way a basis for termination. Shame on the City of Portland's Mayor. "

Girth VonPhister wrote on Jul 22, 2008 2:14 PM:

" When she was asked about the surgery, her response should have been "it's none of your business". She didn't say that. She lied. Plain and simple. It is not a question of medical privacy when she crossed that line and lied. I know all about privacy laws, and I agree. The problem she must get past is the lying. As I said, she could avoided this whole mess by clamming up about her medical issues. It is nobody's business, but when she took the wrong fork in the road by lying, she displayed a lack of integrity. That is the real issue here...Not the surgery.. itself.. "

reasonable1 wrote on Jul 22, 2008 2:46 PM:

" Out-bleepin'-rageous. There is absolutely no reason in the world for her to disclose medical information OR for her employer to act on it - unless she was highly contageous or breaking a law. And "Police officers must be above reproach?" Puh-leez. They're human. They want to keep their jobs. How would you feel if you needed a procedure of a - uh - private nature? Would you broadcast that info, or would you call it something less personal? I'm not litigious by nature, but she sure has a case of some sort. IMO. "

nexus wrote on Jul 22, 2008 2:55 PM:

" Let get to the real root of this story!! Did the surgery work?? ;-) "

Girth VonPhister wrote on Jul 22, 2008 4:14 PM:

" I agree that she wasn't required to disclose her medical information. BUT when asked adout it, SHE LIED! Not only is her integrity compromised, but her very judgement is suspect now. Like it or not, we all want our police officers to be truthful. No matter what... She lied, she lied, she lied. End of story... "

Kelso Guy wrote on Jul 22, 2008 4:21 PM:

" I'm gonna have to agree with girth here, she lied, what happens when she has to testify in a trial?,....sad cause it all could have been avoided and she had every right to just say surgery and "none of your business" if asked specifics. "

Top Jobs
More Top Jobs
Top Garage Sales
More Top Garage Sales
Top Rentals
More Top Rentals