PDA

View Full Version : FL makes doctor gun inquiry illegal


vantec08
05-10-2011, 3:01 AM
http://www.medpagetoday.com/PublicHealthPolicy/PublicHealth/26385

This has been discussed a few times. The FL legislature did it.

Moress
05-10-2011, 3:10 AM
I'm not sure if I agree with this. I think if there are serious mental problems that a pediatrician (sp?) thinks might exist with a child, then I believe he has a right to speak up and tell the parents that perhaps they should keep their firearms under tight lock.

However, like all things in life, abuse can still happen and doctors can and have abused the power of 'asking' about firearms within the doctors office, but I feel like there is no harm in asking, just not recording or writing down any sort of records regarding firearms.

Merc1138
05-10-2011, 3:54 AM
I'm not sure if I agree with this. I think if there are serious mental problems that a pediatrician (sp?) thinks might exist with a child, then I believe he has a right to speak up and tell the parents that perhaps they should keep their firearms under tight lock.

However, like all things in life, abuse can still happen and doctors can and have abused the power of 'asking' about firearms within the doctors office, but I feel like there is no harm in asking, just not recording or writing down any sort of records regarding firearms.

If a child has mental issues bad enough to cause worry over firearms, the same worry should exist for sharp knives or any other potentially dangerous objects and not be firearm specific. There is no need to query about guns in the home in that scenario.

Reductio
05-10-2011, 4:25 AM
I'm not sure if I agree with this. I think if there are serious mental problems that a pediatrician (sp?) thinks might exist with a child, then I believe he has a right to speak up and tell the parents that perhaps they should keep their firearms under tight lock.

However, like all things in life, abuse can still happen and doctors can and have abused the power of 'asking' about firearms within the doctors office, but I feel like there is no harm in asking, just not recording or writing down any sort of records regarding firearms.

Pediatricians aren't mental health experts... they'll know the child far, far less than the parents. Let the parents do their job, and get the doctors the hell away from my guns. There's no possible good this could do.

vantec08
05-10-2011, 4:36 AM
I have no problem with a pediatrician reminding or cautioning parents to be careful with guns in the home. Anything beyond that is intrusion or infringement.

Anchors
05-10-2011, 5:02 AM
If a child has mental issues bad enough to cause worry over firearms, the same worry should exist for sharp knives or any other potentially dangerous objects and not be firearm specific. There is no need to query about guns in the home in that scenario.

This is the most basic truth of the matter.
If your child has such a clear and present issue, then I think there are bigger things to worry about then the kid's "weapon of choice".

Pediatricians aren't mental health experts... they'll know the child far, far less than the parents. Let the parents do their job, and get the doctors the hell away from my guns. There's no possible good this could do.

That is very important. Pediatricians and general practitioners are usually NOT qualified to diagnose any mental disorders. They will, however, refer people to psychiatrists for evaluation.

I have no problem with a pediatrician reminding or cautioning parents to be careful with guns in the home. Anything beyond that is intrusion or infringement.

The problem was that they were reminding them too often and asking the kids about "mommy and daddy's guns". There were cases where the doctor would then go on about firearms safety and locking your gun up. What the hell does a doctor know about gun safety (unless that is a side hobby of his)?

OleCuss
05-10-2011, 5:04 AM
That's a stupid law. There are (admittedly infrequent) legitimate reasons to ask the question.

And so what if the doctor asks? If you don't want to answer, don't answer. Or, if you think they're being nosy and have no business asking - feel free to lie.

But sheesh, around these parts there's a pretty good chance your physician is a gun owner and shooter as well and has no evil designs on your firearm. Odds are pretty good as well, however, that they won't bother writing anything about it in the chart as it usually isn't clinically relevant.

I think it is a stupid law. Mostly because it just shouldn't matter - and it establishes the idea that your doctor can't ask potentially relevant questions.

My PCP knows I have firearms - and is invited to go shooting with me. My Orthopedist probably doesn't know I have firearms - but it's my understanding that he has more than I do. . .

OleCuss
05-10-2011, 5:08 AM
.
.
.
That is very important. Pediatricians and general practitioners are usually NOT qualified to diagnose any mental disorders. . .

Not correct at all. PCP's and Pediatricians are quite qualified to diagnose and treat quite a variety of mental disorders.

. . .They will, however, refer people to psychiatrists for evaluation.

This part is true enough for some - but certainly not all mental health cases.

The problem was that they were reminding them too often and asking the kids about "mommy and daddy's guns". There were cases where the doctor would then go on about firearms safety and locking your gun up. What the hell does a doctor know about gun safety (unless that is a side hobby of his)?

This is a good point. But the answer is to get another physician. If you're locked into that physician by an HMO (increasingly unusual), complain to the insurance company about the irritating, intrusive, and insulting questioning and counseling.

otteray
05-10-2011, 5:38 AM
My HMO asks about it on the annual physical check-up form.
I simply check the answer box for "Does Not Apply":)

Patrick-2
05-10-2011, 6:48 AM
I was in favor of a law that prevented reporting of gun information to an insurance company or outside entity without a court order. I was also in favor of a law that said "you cannot discriminate against someone who owns guns."

I am not in favor of any law that criminalizes the conversation I have with my family's doctors, for any reason. This one - even though it is a compromise - still opens the door to political activists (gun people) filing complaints against doctors with good intentions. Not. Good.


We talk about responsibility like it is some kind of one-way street; that the "other side" has to be responsible enough to make sound choices. We are not free from responsibility to act like adults and avoid passive-aggressive nanny-state policies that prevent some conversations just because we might be uncomfortable with them.

I have been asked the question by my pediatrician. It was a fair question. Newborns and lead bullets are not a good mix. They also asked if I had a pool (I do not). Fireplace? Yes...but I don't use it. Older house that might have lead paint? Nope. Dogs? Cats? Nope. Nope.

In LA I had someone ask about guns in the home even though I didn't have kids at the time. It was political. I told her point blank I did, then asked if she had any problems with it. She responded by saying she was only concerned about safety. I told her my previous employer sent me to far-away nations expressly to be dangerous with guns...she didn't need to worry about my bedroom. Never became an issue. She always treated me like an adult, even when I returned to her office twice in six months for doing the exact same dumb thing. She laughed at me and had her nurse mock me the second time. I deserved it and corrected my idiotic behavior.

Being responsible means talking like adults. Personal view: we have greater concerns than our doctors and the AMA Conspiracy Against Freedom and Puppies (which I think exists).

Some privacy-based rules of the road are nice, but criminalizing adult conversation? Really?

dantodd
05-10-2011, 7:36 AM
The reason this law was passed is simple. The American Academy of Pediatrics decided, many years ago, to pick a side on the gun control debate. Their side lost. The AAP counsels all of its members that guns should NOT be in homes with kids, not that people should use caution when having guns and children in the same vicinity. The AAP then put out a questionnaire that that many pediatricians use that includes a question about firearms in the home.

If a Dr. wants to include firearms in the general discussion about child safety in the home, like putting a plug in an electrical outlet or drawer locks on sharps then go for it but stay out of my gun cabinet. I simply lied on the form at my kids' Dr.'s office.

All that being said, I don't approve of such limits on free speech anymore than I do on the RKBA. Excluding such information from being recorded in the medical records of people would be a far easier way to end the silliness on the AAP forms as those questionnaires are typically part of the medical record and is beyond the scope of basic 1A protections.

Also, I believe that if a child is having a mental problem that the Dr. feels warrants weapons warnings s/he is free to warn the parents about the dangers of firearms, just can't ask if the family owns any.


ETA: That's what I get for not reading the latest article on the issue. It sounds like the bill got pretty well cleaned up. I'll have to read the full text but the article makes it sound like it's only an issue if the info IS documented in the medical records so that's good. There is also an exception for "imminent danger" which is a good change.

Glock22Fan
05-10-2011, 8:13 AM
I have no problem with a pediatrician reminding or cautioning parents to be careful with guns sharp or otherwise dangerous objects in the home. Anything beyond that is intrusion or infringement.


Corrected it for you! :D

"Do you have any dangerous items that your child could easily access?" is fine by me.

wash
05-10-2011, 9:01 AM
I have heard anecdotes about the wrong answer leading to a CPS call.

Having a sister who is anti-gun and a pediatrician, I know that she has no business asking kids about guns, if she wants to ask someone, she should ask the parents and then it should be covered by doctor patient confidentiality.

This law would not be necessary if doctors didn't abuse their position and have professional groups that want to ban guns, cigarettes, ATVs, Happy Meals, motorcycles and medicines you can grow in your back yard.

This is a good thing for Florida in general and Florida gun owners in particular.

G60
05-10-2011, 9:43 AM
Is the link broken?
i've tried from my mobile and at home and it's blank.

CCWFacts
05-10-2011, 9:57 AM
I think this is the wrong thing to do. Pediatricians ask about all kinds of potentially hazardous things, including swimming pools, smoking, household chemicals, and so on, because many parents haven't thought through the potential risks of those things. Guns are hazardous items, just like swimming pools and lawn mowers. Gun owners with children might benefit from a reminder from the pediatrician. A doctor can serve as more than just a medical advisor for people.

And this type of bill makes the NRA look bad. I wish the NRA would focus on stuff that matters.

If a child has mental issues bad enough to cause worry over firearms, the same worry should exist for sharp knives or any other potentially dangerous objects and not be firearm specific. There is no need to query about guns in the home in that scenario.

Yeah there is because plenty of parents are too air-headed to have a comprehensive, common-sense list of what's dangerous. The list is pretty long and I'm sure pediatricians do ask about sharp objects, pools, cars, big dogs, and many many other things that can cause harm.

G60
05-10-2011, 10:07 AM
I think this is the wrong thing to do.

incidents like this are why it's not:
http://www.ocala.com/article/20100723/NEWS/100729867

"When the 26-year-old Summerfield woman refused the answer, the Ocala doctor finished her child's examination and told her she had 30 days to find a new pediatrician and that she wasn't welcome at Children's Health of Ocala anymore."

of course the doctor claims he doesnt care if a household has guns, and we're only seeing 2 sides to the story here, but what we don't see is the truth.

CCWFacts
05-10-2011, 10:18 AM
incidents like this are why it's not:
http://www.ocala.com/article/20100723/NEWS/100729867

"When the 26-year-old Summerfield woman refused the answer, the Ocala doctor finished her child's examination and told her she had 30 days to find a new pediatrician and that she wasn't welcome at Children's Health of Ocala anymore."

of course the doctor claims he doesnt care if a household has guns, and we're only seeing 2 sides to the story here, but what we don't see is the truth.

Certainly there's more than one side to that story. Regardless, I'm sure there are stupid pediatricians who would tell parents "I won't work with you if you don't go to church" or other types of unprofessional, unacceptable conduct. Laws banning docs from asking about guns don't mean that there won't be some docs who behave in unprofessional ways in other contexts.

I personally find personal watercraft (jetskis) to be offensive and I wish they didn't exist and no one had them. And if I were a pediatrician, I would ask questions like, "do your children ever do water activities?" "Yes, we have some jetskis and we like to go out on the lake." I would then respond, "I hope you always have them wear a life vest and any other safety equipment, and please make sure they ride safe. Young people need careful supervision because personal watercraft can be dangerous." That would be the professional advice, it's backed by evidence, and has nothing to do with my adverse opinion about personal watercraft.

twinfin
05-10-2011, 10:18 AM
Does anyone actually know what the new law says? I just tried but had no success in finding the text of the actual law after much google searching. I found plenty of articles commenting but none actually reveal what the law actually says.

The only way to discuss this intelligently is to first see if we can get a link to this new Florida gun law and then we can talk about what the law actually says vs. what we think the law says.

Interestingly, I know that more children under the age of 5 have drowned in five gallon plastic buckets than ALL the children 10 and younger have died by gun fire. Yet, I have NEVER seen a questionnaire in the Doctors office asking about the presence of five gallon buckets in the home.

This leads me to wonder if there are forces at work who are attempting to bring doctors into the anti self defence/anti gun propaganda war.

Clearly, there are greater hazards in the home than guns but why does the "do you have guns?" question get to the top of the list over more deadly hazards that are never asked about?

So, anyone else having trouble finding the text of the actual law?

POLICESTATE
05-10-2011, 10:23 AM
Let the doctors ask what they like, one can always decline to answer or simply lie.

I remember my kids' pediatrician had a form that had medical history and other questions with checkboxes, I just skipped the one about guns.

If asked directly I'll just say "no"

None of their business as far as I'm concerned.

I think having a law forbidding the asking of questions is a bad idea, just so long as you are not compelled to answer that's all we need.

vantec08
05-10-2011, 10:28 AM
Is the link broken?
i've tried from my mobile and at home and it's blank.

medpagetoday's links arent working at the moment. Maybe server inquire overload.

heres another link - - - http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2011/05/08/new-florida-gun-law-muzzles-pediatricians-health-care-workers/

vantec08
05-10-2011, 10:46 AM
Does anyone actually know what the new law says? I just tried but had no success in finding the text of the actual law after much google searching. I found plenty of articles commenting but none actually reveal what the law actually says.

The only way to discuss this intelligently is to first see if we can get a link to this new Florida gun law and then we can talk about what the law actually says vs. what we think the law says.

Interestingly, I know that more children under the age of 5 have drowned in five gallon plastic buckets than ALL the children 10 and younger have died by gun fire. Yet, I have NEVER seen a questionnaire in the Doctors office asking about the presence of five gallon buckets in the home.

This leads me to wonder if there are forces at work who are attempting to bring doctors into the anti self defence/anti gun propaganda war.

Clearly, there are greater hazards in the home than guns but why does the "do you have guns?" question get to the top of the list over more deadly hazards that are never asked about?

So, anyone else having trouble finding the text of the actual law?

Its house bill 155, senate bill 432
http://www.flsenate.gov/Session/Bill/2011/0432/BillText/Filed/PDF

http://www.flsenate.gov/Session/Bill/2011/0432/Amendment/238870/PDF

http://www.flsenate.gov/Session/Bill/2011/0432/BillText/c1/PDF

wash
05-10-2011, 10:50 AM
The key thing here is that a three year old will say all sorts of things and doesn't really understand what they are saying all the time.

If an anti-gun pediatrician or school nurse gets them alone for a minute they can get them to say all sorts of things, especially if they are little kids that like to run around with water guns or something.

If they want to ask someone, they should ask the parents and then the parents have the choice in how to answer.

Doctors need to learn to mind their own business, that is medicine, not their patients exercise of their civil rights.

Untamed1972
05-10-2011, 10:51 AM
If a doctor had a concern he could simply issue a warning to the effect of "I am not asking you have any guns in your home nor do I want to know, BUT....If you have guns at home you might want to consider........." with out actually asking if they have guns.

A general admonision I think would be marginally acceptable vs. asking a direct question which puts the patient in the uncomfortable position of having to answer, decline to answer, lie, or tell the Dr. to mind his own business.

POLICESTATE
05-10-2011, 10:53 AM
The key thing here is that a three year old will say all sorts of things and doesn't really understand what they are saying all the time.

If an anti-gun pediatrician or school nurse gets them alone for a minute they can get them to say all sorts of things, especially if they are little kids that like to run around with water guns or something.

If they want to ask someone, they should ask the parents and then the parents have the choice in how to answer.

Doctors need to learn to mind their own business, that is medicine, not their patients exercise of their civil rights.


My 3 year old already knows not to talk about guns with people outside the family. :D

My 6 year old knew about 3 years old the same thing.

safewaysecurity
05-10-2011, 10:53 AM
If the Doctor is not an NRA certified range instructor then I do not think they qualify to lecture me about gun safety and potentially give me unsafe advice.

wash
05-10-2011, 12:18 PM
My 3 year old already knows not to talk about guns with people outside the family. :D

My 6 year old knew about 3 years old the same thing.
And you are 100% confident that a doctor with a lollipop couldn't change their mind?

Very young, we tell our kids "this doctor needs to give you a shot" or "this doctor needs to hit your knee with a hammer" we are already telling them to let doctors do some things that we wouldn't let other people do to our kids.

This law stops doctors from abusing that trust.

If I were to tell a doctor that I like smoking a cigarette while riding an ATV out of the cargo hold of a plane at 12,000 ft with a loaded gun and a parachute, they should say "evidence suggests that smoking cigarettes causes cancer, you should wear a helmet while riding an ATV and try not to shoot yourself".

They shouldn't be able to take that info and raise your insurance premiums, call CPS or do anything more than put a small note in your confidential medical records.

vantec08
05-10-2011, 12:23 PM
And you are 100% confident that a doctor with a lollipop couldn't change their mind?

Very young, we tell our kids "this doctor needs to give you a shot" or "this doctor needs to hit your knee with a hammer" we are already telling them to let doctors do some things that we wouldn't let other people do to our kids.

This law stops doctors from abusing that trust.

If I were to tell a doctor that I like smoking a cigarette while riding an ATV out of the cargo hold of a plane at 12,000 ft with a loaded gun and a parachute, they should say "evidence suggests that smoking cigarettes causes cancer, you should wear a helmet while riding an ATV and try not to shoot yourself".

They shouldn't be able to take that info and raise your insurance premiums, call CPS or do anything more than put a small note in your confidential medical records.


Dam right. Bureaucracies WILL abuse information . . any of them. Its in their nature.

Patrick-2
05-10-2011, 12:41 PM
Prevent the recording of the information in databases accessible to anyone outside the doctor's office. Problem. Solved.

I have no problem with an anti-gun doctor. Really...not an issue. We have a 'problem pregnancy' right now and we got to Hopkins in downtown Baltimore. Not the most gun-friendly place in the world but they are tops at medical everything. I care only that they do more than anyone for our future #2 kid (it's a boy, BTW). They are literally tops above anyone else, anywhere. You have no idea.

Florida went too far. The anti's are not the only ones who knee-jerk sometimes.

johnthomas
05-10-2011, 12:46 PM
When I first started going to my doctor, that was a question he asked me. I said, Why, are you checking to see if I am protected at home in Salinas? Do you have any for sale?
And I laughed, he gave me a strange look and said, I don't believe in guns, I said I do.I believe in our rights to own gun if we choose, just like you have the right not to. He said so, the answer is yes? I said it's not yes or no, I don't answer silly questions. Then he got down to Doctor business, we don't talk about guns.

POLICESTATE
05-10-2011, 1:02 PM
Yes I am. My 6 year old would even say she doesn't want it because it has bad sugar in it.

The key to the battle for your kids' minds is to get there first.

Act beats React.




And you are 100% confident that a doctor with a lollipop couldn't change their mind?

Very young, we tell our kids "this doctor needs to give you a shot" or "this doctor needs to hit your knee with a hammer" we are already telling them to let doctors do some things that we wouldn't let other people do to our kids.

This law stops doctors from abusing that trust.

If I were to tell a doctor that I like smoking a cigarette while riding an ATV out of the cargo hold of a plane at 12,000 ft with a loaded gun and a parachute, they should say "evidence suggests that smoking cigarettes causes cancer, you should wear a helmet while riding an ATV and try not to shoot yourself".

They shouldn't be able to take that info and raise your insurance premiums, call CPS or do anything more than put a small note in your confidential medical records.

wash
05-10-2011, 1:21 PM
Ok but why should you even have to worry about that question?

Doctors aren't god, they aren't infallible, some of them threw out the Hippocratic oath long ago.

I'm not the mercury in vaccines tin foil hat type but trusting a doctor blindly is one of the silliest things you can do.

So far beside my sister I haven't had any negative doctor interactions over guns but once I had a doctor straight up lie to my face about a test result (not the result but the normal range) and once I had a doctor fail to inform me of an abnormal test result before I went in to surgery.

I know some people like to bury their head in the sand and take the pills their doctor gives them but I'm concerned about my health enough to double check my doctor's work.

Most doctors are fine but some will try to cure you of diseases which are only in their head. Laws like this help prevent that.

Another way to look at it is that medical schools purposefully indoctrinate their students with anti gun nonsense and then they try to spew that bile on your kids. It might not work on your kids but it might work on some.

twinfin
05-10-2011, 1:38 PM
Its house bill 155, senate bill 432
http://www.flsenate.gov/Session/Bill/2011/0432/BillText/Filed/PDF

http://www.flsenate.gov/Session/Bill/2011/0432/Amendment/238870/PDF

http://www.flsenate.gov/Session/Bill/2011/0432/BillText/c1/PDF

Thank you vantec08 for the links. Your Google Foo is stronger than mine.

From the Florida law, we learn that:

- Your gun ownership is a private matter and as a private matter, a doctor or other care provider may not ask you about you or your family members gun ownership status, nor refuse to provide care to you for refusing to discuss your gun ownership status.

- If you willingly or inadvertently mention that you or your family members own guns, this information can not be recorded or transmitted to others.

- Provides for punishment for violations of the new law.

- Lists practical exemptions for when a doctor or other health care member such as a psychologist or social worker may bring up gun ownership when directly related to a mental health issue that you are being treated for.

I did not see anything that prevented a doctor from giving advice to parents to be sure to secure their home from hazards to young children.

GaryV
05-10-2011, 2:25 PM
I'm not sure if I agree with this. I think if there are serious mental problems that a pediatrician (sp?) thinks might exist with a child, then I believe he has a right to speak up and tell the parents that perhaps they should keep their firearms under tight lock.

Doctors may still talk about gun safety issues. What they cannot do is ask whether you own guns. If they believe there is a reason to council parents about safety issues, including guns, they still can.


That's a stupid law. There are (admittedly infrequent) legitimate reasons to ask the question.

And so what if the doctor asks? If you don't want to answer, don't answer. Or, if you think they're being nosy and have no business asking - feel free to lie.

The problem was that some doctors allegedly had refused treatment to children whose parents refused to answer. There was also strong suspicion that the information was being compiled to further anti-gun propaganda and "research". Again, the law doesn't prevent the doctor from discussing guns as a safety issue, it just prevents them from demanding that you disclose ownership.

POLICESTATE
05-10-2011, 4:02 PM
Good points, true not all parents are like me and I have had bad experiences with doctors not running tests/diagnosis and guessing which led to a lot of problems for me when they diagnosed me with GERD (and it turned out I had the opposite).

Looking at what the law accomplishes it does seem good, especially in that it prevents them from sharing information about gun ownership in the event they find out about it anyway.

Maybe it wouldn't be a bad idea to have a law like that here in CA, although that means we would never have it. We only make bad ideas into law here :(


Ok but why should you even have to worry about that question?

Doctors aren't god, they aren't infallible, some of them threw out the Hippocratic oath long ago.

I'm not the mercury in vaccines tin foil hat type but trusting a doctor blindly is one of the silliest things you can do.

So far beside my sister I haven't had any negative doctor interactions over guns but once I had a doctor straight up lie to my face about a test result (not the result but the normal range) and once I had a doctor fail to inform me of an abnormal test result before I went in to surgery.

I know some people like to bury their head in the sand and take the pills their doctor gives them but I'm concerned about my health enough to double check my doctor's work.

Most doctors are fine but some will try to cure you of diseases which are only in their head. Laws like this help prevent that.

Another way to look at it is that medical schools purposefully indoctrinate their students with anti gun nonsense and then they try to spew that bile on your kids. It might not work on your kids but it might work on some.

five.five-six
05-10-2011, 4:14 PM
IMO, rule #9 applies here

http://www.teamspeed.com/forums/attachments/team-speed-shooting-range/10325d1215031827-top-ten-gun-safety-tips-imaogun600.jpg

POLICESTATE
05-10-2011, 4:29 PM
IMO, rule #9 applies here

http://www.teamspeed.com/forums/attachments/team-speed-shooting-range/10325d1215031827-top-ten-gun-safety-tips-imaogun600.jpg

According to Rule #10 I can sweep people in San Fransicko and I'd be A-OK!

ZombieTactics
05-10-2011, 5:04 PM
I have no problem with a pediatrician reminding or cautioning parents to be careful with guns in the home. Anything beyond that is intrusion or infringement.
I have a giant problem with anyone who is so arrogant as to advise me on a subject about which they have demonstrated ZERO knowledge. Pediatricians have no special training regarding guns, knives, automobiles or any one of hundreds of other "dangerous things".

Any physician giving such advice should be viewed as having questionable intelligence and/or motives.

vantec08
05-10-2011, 5:37 PM
I have a giant problem with anyone who is so arrogant as to advise me on a subject about which they have demonstrated ZERO knowledge. Pediatricians have no special training regarding guns, knives, automobiles or any one of hundreds of other "dangerous things".

Any physician giving such advice should be viewed as having questionable intelligence and/or motives.

Try changing a couple words - "I have a giant problem with any parent who is so stupid as to not have the frigging sense God gave a goose to keep dangerous objects away from their now crawling toddler, which includes guns etc." Again, I have no problem with a well meaning physician who can discern immature or irresponsible parents when he sees them. As mentioned, it became a problem when it was codified into a medical procedure and ALL parents were presumed to be dumber than a shovel handle. Big mistake.

cmichini
05-10-2011, 6:02 PM
Medical practiioners are physicians. Those that have a PhD are 'doctors'. Physicians are medevial (sp?) barbers with modern tools, doctors are usually learned academics.

Similar to the clips vs. magazines debate, let's make sure we use the correct terminology.

As to the question, they should be advising about all dangerous items and situations, not cherry pick risks based on political ideology. JMO

wash
05-10-2011, 6:13 PM
MDs are doctors too.

I wonder if the bill is written to specify physicians rather than academic doctorates?

Hell, I bought a "doktorate" for $30 once, I wonder if I can go to Florida and ask people about guns.

ZombieTactics
05-10-2011, 6:25 PM
Try changing a couple words - "I have a giant problem with any parent who is so stupid as to not have the frigging sense God gave a goose to keep dangerous objects away from their now crawling toddler, which includes guns etc." I have a giant problem with those people too ... how far do you want to go with this, because there is a looooong list of things FAR more likely to result in harm to children than firearms in the home.

Again, I have no problem with a well meaning physician who can discern immature or irresponsible parents when he sees them. I am unaware of any special "powers of discernment" granted to physicians. Frankly, I find many of them to be dumber than a post about anything besides medicine. If you want to include first the gigantic list of things likely to be an issue ... get ready for 3-hour long office visits. If you don't want to do that, them let me suggest that your position is driven by something other than reason or a genuine concern "for the children!"

The road to hell is paved with good intentions, and it's usually paved by people who are "well meaning".

People should stick to what they know. I know a helluva lot more about firearms than most physicians, but that doesn't make me qualified to treat gunshot wounds. My kids' pediatrician went to school many years to learn a whole host of things about which I haven't the slightest clue ... but he knows almost NOTHING about guns. The question (about guns in the home) reveals NOTHING to him within his area of responsibility or expertise, and NOTHING about which he is qualified to offer advice any more valuable on the subject.

If anyone believes otherwise, please tell me ONE THING a doctor could offer in advice about firearms ownership, which is information or knowledge unique to his/her profession?

... it became a problem when it was codified into a medical procedure and ALL parents were presumed to be dumber than a shovel handle. Big mistake. On this we agree. As such we should constantly remind physicians that they are not "life counselors" on any subject outside of their area of expertise.

InGrAM
05-10-2011, 6:32 PM
I have heard anecdotes about the wrong answer leading to a CPS call.

Having a sister who is anti-gun and a pediatrician, I know that she has no business asking kids about guns, if she wants to ask someone, she should ask the parents and then it should be covered by doctor patient confidentiality.

This law would not be necessary if doctors didn't abuse their position and have professional groups that want to ban guns, cigarettes, ATVs, Happy Meals, motorcycles and medicines you can grow in your back yard.

This is a good thing for Florida in general and Florida gun owners in particular.

+1 (it is very hard for someone with power over others not to abuse it in some way or another) These types of laws are necessary.

vantec08
05-10-2011, 7:20 PM
I have a giant problem with those people too ... how far do you want to go with this, because there is a looooong list of things FAR more likely to result in harm to children than firearms in the home.

I will say it ONCE more, than am done, evidently you didnt get it (or have a need to argue about grains of sand). I have no problem with a well meaning physician sincerely concerned for a little kid that has stupid, immature, or irresponsible parents.

ok . .. . . . . its dessert oclock

Anchors
05-10-2011, 8:58 PM
Not correct at all. PCP's and Pediatricians are quite qualified to diagnose and treat quite a variety of mental disorders.

This part is true enough for some - but certainly not all mental health cases.

This is a good point. But the answer is to get another physician. If you're locked into that physician by an HMO (increasingly unusual), complain to the insurance company about the irritating, intrusive, and insulting questioning and counseling.

"Qualified" and "permitted" are two different things. We all know that GP doctors have a reputation among the specialized crowd as getting a little carried away with practicing outside of their areas of proficiency....
My back hurt when I was a teenager and my GP offered to "adjust it" for me...Let me just say that I'm glad the girl I was dating at the time's dad was a chiropractor with 20+ years of practice. He was able to correct the mistake the GP caused immediately in his livingroom. Haha.

I was in favor of a law that prevented reporting of gun information to an insurance company or outside entity without a court order. I was also in favor of a law that said "you cannot discriminate against someone who owns guns."

I am not in favor of any law that criminalizes the conversation I have with my family's doctors, for any reason. This one - even though it is a compromise - still opens the door to political activists (gun people) filing complaints against doctors with good intentions.
I have been asked the question by my pediatrician. It was a fair question. Newborns and lead bullets are not a good mix. They also asked if I had a pool (I do not). Fireplace? Yes...but I don't use it. Older house that might have lead paint? Nope. Dogs? Cats? Nope. Nope.

Being responsible means talking like adults. Personal view: we have greater concerns than our doctors and the AMA Conspiracy Against Freedom and Puppies (which I think exists).

Some privacy-based rules of the road are nice, but criminalizing adult conversation? Really?

Some adult conversion is already criminalized between you and your doctor/other professionals. Your privacy trumps your doctor's right to free speech, personally. I'm glad the government passed a law to keep him focused on work. He should just be asking "is there anything in the home that could be potentially hazardous to your child's health?" YES OR NO.

I see your point about criminalizing conversation being a bad thing, but I don't really consider speech while consulting your professional (lawyer, doctor, etc) casual conversation.
Would you be mad if your lawyer asked whether or not you were gay? (in a land lease deal, because the neighbors could potentially be intolerant of your sexual orientation).
How about if your auto-mechanic asks if you cheat on your wife? (because she could get mad and pour sugar in your tank).
How about if a judge asked if you were "100% white" or not?

That is mostly why I agree with the law.

The reason this law was passed is simple. The American Academy of Pediatrics decided, many years ago, to pick a side on the gun control debate. Their side lost. The AAP counsels all of its members that guns should NOT be in homes with kids, not that people should use caution when having guns and children in the same vicinity. The AAP then put out a questionnaire that many pediatricians use that includes a question about firearms in the home.

All that being said, I don't approve of such limits on free speech anymore than I do on the RKBA. Excluding such information from being recorded in the medical records of people would be a far easier way to end the silliness on the AAP forms as those questionnaires are typically part of the medical record and is beyond the scope of basic 1A protections.

Also, I believe that if a child is having a mental problem that the Dr. feels warrants weapons warnings s/he is free to warn the parents about the dangers of firearms, just can't ask if the family owns any.

ETA: That's what I get for not reading the latest article on the issue. It sounds like the bill got pretty well cleaned up. I'll have to read the full text but the article makes it sound like it's only an issue if the info IS documented in the medical records so that's good. There is also an exception for "imminent danger" which is a good change.

I agree, but I don't even think a doctor should be warning you about the dangers of firearms unless he has reason to believe there is a danger (outside of mental condition).
I've never heard a doctor say "keep him away from ledges, the cabinet under the sink, and the knife drawer". If they're going to warn about total danger then I am fine with them including guns.

Corrected it for you! :D

"Do you have any dangerous items that your child could easily access?" is fine by me.

Perfect^

The key thing here is that a three year old will say all sorts of things and doesn't really understand what they are saying all the time.

Some of my adult friends think my ARs and AKs are "machine guns" or "illegal" even though I have told them many times over they are neither.
Imagine what a kid thinks your AR is?
"Ya! Daddy has like 10 machine guns and lots of bullets!!"
Doctor calls police, etc.

If the Doctor is not an NRA certified range instructor then I do not think they qualify to lecture me about gun safety and potentially give me unsafe advice.

THIS. I don't lecture him about the intricacies of bio-hazard disposal and sharps containers or pretend to know more about medical safety than he does.
I'm certain I know more about gun safety than my doctor.

Patrick-2
05-11-2011, 3:53 AM
My local doctor warned me that even fully-jacketed bullets have lead, mercury and other toxic metals on them that are dangerous to children. Also pointed out that shiny metal things look like awesome mouth toys to a kid and they can choke.

Yes - written on the internet, this seems patently obvious. But pediatricians see all kinds of things and I see no harm in a little warning here and there. I avoid rolling my eyes and I do not take them as condescending. In my line of work, I do the same thing with my clients - precisely because otherwise smart people can do some really dumb things every now and then. We all get brain farts and newborns don't come with a user's manual. We felt rpepared, but you never really are. I took even the obvious advice with a good dose of humility and appreciation.

My only concern with the question at a doctor's office is the potential to record it at the insurance company (or elsewhere). Insurers would have a field day increasing premiums for gun owners due to 'increased risk'. I think that is part of the AMA game plan: make guns an unaffordable lifestyle choice, like tobacco. Of course, that is also the plan of many anti-gun people: Bloomberg, Daley, the entire DC Council, etc.

socal2310
05-11-2011, 7:39 AM
I don't really have a problem with the way the law is written. Nothing in it prevents the doctor from providing literature on firearms storage or even talking to parents about the importance of securing firearms out of reach of children. All it does is remove one avenue of political manipulation from the equation. The same doctor could assume that every parent is a firearm owner and include guns in his child safety discussions without violating the law. It also won't stop the doctor from asking if you own firearms if he believes your child is depressed or mentally ill - importantly however, he will be asking you, not your kid (for obvious reasons).

Ryan