State proposes legislation making it illegal for doctors to ask about gun possession

[PedOncoDoc]

Link to story (http://www.nwfdailynews.com/news/-36599--.html)

New measure would bar doctors from asking patients if they own guns

TALLAHASSEE — Doctors and other medical providers in Florida would be barred from asking patients — or the parents of child patients — if they have guns in their home under a measure that promises a major showdown between powerful lobbying groups.

The National Rifle Association’s top Florida lobbyist and a Florida Medical Association member both say the issue is among the top priorities for the upcoming legislative session, with the groups holding diametrically opposed positions on what doctors and their patients and families should be allowed to discuss during a medical visit....

The bill is short (just over 2 pages), with a link to it in the story above.

This is a terrible idea IMHO - gun rights activists are going too far and making a bad name for themselves with this proposed legislation. The only part I agree with is preventing a health care provider from refusing to provide care if someone does not answer their inquiries about firearm use.

When practicing general pediatrics I always asked about the presence of firearms in the home. If someone answered yes, I asked how they were stored and asked if there were 2 responsible people in the home who could clear the weapon (in case it was accidentally left out and the owner was not at home.) I had many women agree that they shouldn't view the family firearm(s) as "dad's guns - I leave them alone", and many were appreciative that I encouraged them to learn how to safely handly the guns that were in their homes.

Psychiatrists have to be able to assess a potentially suicidal/homicidal patient's ability to cause bodily harm. Preventing this line of inquiry is also asinine. This proposed law would have preventing a psychiatric from asking jerkoff who went on the shooting spree if he owned guns. If brought to a psychiatrists attention earlier enough, he would not have been legally able to purchase guns and would have to have gotten them through other means which would've helped keep the call for more laws/restrictions from the gun control libs in check.

(On a side note, I believe the college that told the AZ shooter not to come back without a mental health professional's declaration that he is not a threat to himself or others was criminally negligent in not calling for a emergency mental health if they felt strong enough to ask him to leave their school.)

[Pete]

........This is a terrible idea IMHO - gun rights activists are going too far and making a bad name for themselves with this proposed legislation.........................

Do you ask the same about alcoholic drinks in the home? Are there? Under lock and key or just stored in the cabinet?

Do you demand a list of the meds the parents are on and where / how they are stored?

Or is it just firearms?

Edited to add - I forgot about 5 gal Utility buckets. Do you ask if there are any of them in the home? In ground pools - ask about them?

[JJ_BPK]

When practicing general pediatrics I always asked about the presence of firearms in the home. If someone answered yes, I asked how they were stored and asked if there were 2 responsible people in the home who could clear the weapon (in case it was accidentally left out and the owner was not at home.) I had many women agree that they shouldn't view the family firearm(s) as "dad's guns - I leave them alone", and many were appreciative that I encouraged them to learn how to safely handly the guns that were in their homes.



WERE DID YOU GET TO BE JUDGE & JURY,, or the authority to be one of big sis's squealers??

Unless there is a weapon present or a wound, you have no reason to grill your patients about their personal possessions.

Do you have a sing on your door warning all who enter that you are collecting personal info for the TSA???

Asking anyone for personal info when they a hurt, sick, and vulnerable is wrong..

Sorry Doc, you may THINK you play God,, but you are not an LEO, Judge, nor jury..

The fact that the left has enacted laws to encourage you to do any collecting is totally wrong.

Not your job...

RANT OFF.. :mad:

[PedOncoDoc]

I wasn't expecting such a strong adverse reaction to this post.

Do you ask the same about alcoholic drinks in the home? Are there? Under lock and key or just stored in the cabinet?

Do you demand a list of the meds the parents are on and where / how they are stored?

Or is it just firearms?

Edited to add - I forgot about 5 gal Utility buckets. Do you ask if there are any of them in the home? In ground pools - ask about them?

I never asked for a catalog of firearms - just if all adults present in the home could make the firearms safe should one accidentally be left out.

I did ask about the storage of medications, alcohol and toxic cleaners/substances, as well as the presence of swimming pools and water/drowning safety (yes, this does include discussion of standing water in buckets and other containers) - but never cataloged any of them.

Now that I am out of primary care, I no longer deal with these issues, but I enjoy the discussion here.

WERE DID YOU GET TO BE JUDGE & JURY,, or the authority to be one of big sis's squealers??

Unless there is a weapon present or a wound, you have no reason to grill your patients about their personal possessions.

Do you have a sing on your door warning all who enter that you are collecting personal info for the TSA???

Asking anyone for personal info when they a hurt, sick, and vulnerable is wrong..

Sorry Doc, you may THINK you play God,, but you are not an LEO, Judge, nor jury..

The fact that the left has enacted laws to encourage you to do any collecting is totally wrong.
Not your job...

The inquiries only came during routine care of well children when we assess their development and environment, and provide immunizations- never during sick/urgent visits.

Please help me understand your comments about being a "squealer" or "collecter" - none of the discussions are reported to anyone, and, to my knowledge, there is no law encouraging or requiring any line of inquiry. I also do not feel it appropriate to make any of the above questions illegal.

I always felt that encouraging any responsible person who had a gun in their home to seek out training to safely and effectively handle/use said weapon was a good thing. :confused:

[Pete]

........I always felt that encouraging any responsible person who had a gun in their home to seek out training to safely and effectively handle/use said weapon was a good thing. :confused:

Do you advise those with pools to get water safety instruction from the local Y or Red Cross?

http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/children.htm

Child mortality in the US covers a lot of causes - and at a quick read the Firearms stats are broken down into three broad areas - accident, self inflicted and crime.

We can discount crime in our talks - and suicide? People can find a way with anything.

So if we focus just on accidents its after vehicle accidents and right in the middle of the pack on the other accidents.

The point being - why is the government involved in the questioning about firearms?

[Paslode]

When practicing general pediatrics I always asked about the presence of firearms in the home. If someone answered yes, I asked how they were stored and asked if there were 2 responsible people in the home who could clear the weapon (in case it was accidentally left out and the owner was not at home.) I had many women agree that they shouldn't view the family firearm(s) as "dad's guns - I leave them alone", and many were appreciative that I encouraged them to learn how to safely handly the guns that were in their homes.



If you want to put up posters, have hand outs available in the office or put on seminars on gun safety that is fine, but I don't believe it is any of my Doctors business if I do or don't own firearms....or hi-cap mags, rounds of ammo in my possession, number of weapons, caliber of weapons, knives in my possession......or anything else for that matter.

For all I know your adding the information to to my patient file, which may or may not be added to a database of which insurance companies may use to make policy and adjust rates.



Psychiatrists have to be able to assess a potentially suicidal/homicidal patient's ability to cause bodily harm. Preventing this line of inquiry is also asinine. This proposed law would have preventing a psychiatric from asking jerkoff who went on the shooting spree if he owned guns. If brought to a psychiatrists attention earlier enough, he would not have been legally able to purchase guns and would have to have gotten them through other means which would've helped keep the call for more laws/restrictions from the gun control libs in check.




Maybe. They may have just prescribed mind altering drugs and told him to come back for a follow up in 2-3 weeks.

And even if had been adjudicated as mentally ill, instead of buying his pistol at Sportman's Warehouse and ammo at Walmart, the crazy man would have procured it illegally in a back alley and the results would have been the same.

[PedOncoDoc]

The point being - why is the government involved in the questioning about firearms?

My point exactly - I believe there shouldn't be laws encouraging for forbidding the process.

ETA: Also, I asked the parents who brought the child to the check-up if they were comfortable handling the firearm, if they replied anything other than a confident, "yes" I merely suggested the parents should consider getting some training.

[Pete]

My point exactly - I believe there shouldn't be laws encouraging for forbidding the process.

.....or mandating it.

[PedOncoDoc]

And even if had been adjudicated as mentally ill, instead of buying his pistol at Sportman's Warehouse and ammo at Walmart, the crazy man would have procured it illegally in a back alley and the results would have been the same.

Agreed - the tragedy probably would not have been averted. However, the gun control pols would have a weaker argument to further their cause for more restrictions.

[PedOncoDoc]

.....or mandating it.

Again - we agree on this one. I also never had a problem with anyone telling me it was none of my business if they own firearms or not. I would simply then tell them that if there were, I would recommend making sure all adults in the house be familiar with the firearms and how to safely handle them.

The pediatrician that prompted the debate in Florida was wrong IMHO. You cannot deny medical care or tell someone to seek care elsewhere because you don't agree with their lifestyle or views. Imaging the same scenario, except replacing the reasons for denying care "gun owner" with "(insert religion of choice here)" - you would have a lawsuit on your hands faster than anything.

[Deadhead 63A1]

I'd have collected my son, walked out of your office, and found another provider if you'd have asked me a question like that, Doc. You wouldn't have appreciated my verbal response either.

[Sacamuelas]

I agree with one particular aspect of the proposed law. IMO, I think it is a terrible precedent to set for the future that lawmakers are now regulating speech between a doctor/patient.
The only part I agree with is preventing a health care provider from refusing to provide care if someone does not answer their inquiries about firearm use.
IMO, Restricting conversation, felonies, fines, etc are WAY over the top for simply asking questions and inquiring about environments. They should have focused on punishing practitioners if they refuse care or discriminate.

THis is a classic example of the failure of a professional board to perform its duty and self regulate its profession. If the profession won't regulate itself, then lawmakers have no choice to step in to the debate. Of course, lawmakers have NO medical training or experience so you end up with laws like the above.
:munchin

[Pete]

..... I would simply then tell them that if there were, I would recommend making sure all adults in the house be familiar with the firearms and how to safely handle them............

I asked you about pools a few posts above. You didn't respond other than to say you asked.

Estimates place weapons in far more homes than pools yet accidental firearms deaths and drownings are similar in statistics. That would place pools as a far greater danger to children than firearms.

I ask if you spend as much time talking with the parents about pool safety - equipment, training, security, etc as you do firearms - if not more?

[Paslode]

Agreed - the tragedy probably would not have been averted. However, the gun control pols would have a weaker argument to further their cause for more restrictions.

That might depend on how they spin it.

Unfortunately if the Pro-Gun folks give 1 inch, the Anti-Gunners will try to take a mile or two. So today the Doc is just asking a question, tomorrow he is adding to a data base, then the insurance companies take advantage of the information, then DHS, then TSA, etc. etc.

It is a a evil road to travel.

[PedOncoDoc]

I asked you about pools a few posts above. You didn't respond other than to say you asked.

Estimates place weapons in far more homes than pools yet accidental firearms deaths and drownings are similar in statistics. That would place pools as a far greater danger to children than firearms.

I ask if you spend as much time talking with the parents about pool safety - equipment, training, security, etc as you do firearms - if not more?

I apologize for not addressing your question about pools. I did ask about pools and also about pool safety. We discussed the potential safety benefit of fences and having having safety devices present. As I am unaware of formal pool safety courses outside of lifesaver courses I did not inquire further.

You make a good point about the number of drowning and firearm deaths. In the region in which I worked previously there were very few families with pools, so this topic tended not to come up very often.

[The Reaper]

Doc, I have to strongly disagree with your premise.

You do not have a need to know this info, any more than you need to know many other private matters that do not immediately concern the cause of my visit.

Frankly, if you asked me that question, or felt it necessary to lecture me about firearms risks, I would be looking for a new doc pretty quickly.

As noted, I would think that there are many other potential health risks that would be much more significant than firearms ownership.

TR

[Dozer523]

I asked you about pools a few posts above. You didn't respond other than to say you asked.
Estimates place weapons in far more homes than pools yet accidental firearms deaths and drownings are similar in statistics. That would place pools as a far greater danger to children than firearms.

I ask if you spend as much time talking with the parents about pool safety - equipment, training, security, etc as you do firearms - if not more? Pete, you also asked about alcohol, you didn't ask about car keys.
Something to consider is the idea of how attractive the device is and how much damage it can do and how quickly the damage can be done.

Of the three, unattended, loaded firearms, accessable to children is most likely to have the most catastrophic consequences in the shortest amount of time. Most people who own guns do so responsibly (except for that little guy's dad in STL who shot himself this morning, but . . . ) As do people who have pools -- most are in a fence and many communities require that. I pulled my 2 YO out of my parent's pool and know how I felt But I had 4 to 10 minutes knew how to administer mouth to mouth resucitation.
The mommy of the little boy mentioned earlier did not have but a split second of the trigger squeeze and head trauma requires more care.
In my daughter's case, I did not assume the pool was unloaded and saafely stored. And maybe that is why when I didn't hear her after a minute or two I just knew.
Doc, when I bring my kids to you, Please ask anything related to the safety of my kids. Ask me to think about it, plan for it, it's not like you're asking me to drain the pool.

[casey]

Link to story (http://www.nwfdailynews.com/news/-36599--.html)



The bill is short (just over 2 pages), with a link to it in the story above.

This is a terrible idea IMHO - gun rights activists are going too far and making a bad name for themselves with this proposed legislation. The only part I agree with is preventing a health care provider from refusing to provide care if someone does not answer their inquiries about firearm use.

When practicing general pediatrics I always asked about the presence of firearms in the home. If someone answered yes, I asked how they were stored and asked if there were 2 responsible people in the home who could clear the weapon (in case it was accidentally left out and the owner was not at home.) I had many women agree that they shouldn't view the family firearm(s) as "dad's guns - I leave them alone", and many were appreciative that I encouraged them to learn how to safely handly the guns that were in their homes.

Psychiatrists have to be able to assess a potentially suicidal/homicidal patient's ability to cause bodily harm. Preventing this line of inquiry is also asinine. This proposed law would have preventing a psychiatric from asking jerkoff who went on the shooting spree if he owned guns. If brought to a psychiatrists attention earlier enough, he would not have been legally able to purchase guns and would have to have gotten them through other means which would've helped keep the call for more laws/restrictions from the gun control libs in check.

(On a side note, I believe the college that told the AZ shooter not to come back without a mental health professional's declaration that he is not a threat to himself or others was criminally negligent in not calling for a emergency mental health if they felt strong enough to ask him to leave their school.)


Totally agree with Pete on this one - I always thought it was over stepping.

Remember- many psychiatrists have missed or ignored the signs of a patients ability to commit bodily harm - hell, one even took part in a homicidal rampage (Nidal Hassan) - the point is, any data and statistics can be skewed, and rarely do we hear of the "missed" diagnosis.

So you Doc, have asked your questions of a child/parent in a perfectly objective mannerism with the true intent of possibly bringing a relative safety issue in the home to light. But in opening that door, why does your (the) concern stop with firearms? Why not ask the pointed questions, where threats can be culled - is thier drug use in the house, if so who uses, what kind, and how often? Has the child ever witnessed their Daddy or Mommy punch or hit each other? Is the attending parent the victim of spousal abuse? Has the child ever been in the car when Mommy or Daddy were drinking/drunk? Does the attending parent drink to excess or drive while under the influence?

Quite frankly, I believe the only people who are going to tell you the truth about their legal gun ownership are the very people who take gun ownership and safety seriously. And while you may have good intentions, understand that some other practitioners may have a decidedly different agenda (anti-gun etc) during their patient interview.

I won't even begin to address the hypocrisy within this same system but will just relate that in 28 years on the street, I have yet to hear any of our inner city ER's or Health Clinics ask or request any information relative to "gun ownership" or even possession of firearms in the home - but thats just my observation.

[Pete]

Pete, you also asked about alcohol, you didn't ask about car keys.
Something to consider is the idea of how attractive the device is and how much damage it can do and how quickly the damage can be done.
.........................l.

Dozer, I posted a link with the stats. Dead is dead - no matter what the cause.

A home with a pool has a far greater chance of having a child killed than a home with a gun.

But vehicles are higher on the list than both pools and guns. But then that gets into the whole seat belt safety seat issue.

[PedOncoDoc]

So you Doc, have asked your questions of a child/parent in a perfectly objective mannerism with the true intent of possibly bringing a relative safety issue in the home to light. But in opening that door, why does your (the) concern stop with firearms? Why not ask the pointed questions, where threats can be culled - is thier drug use in the house, if so who uses, what kind, and how often? Has the child ever witnessed their Daddy or Mommy punch or hit each other? Is the attending parent the victim of spousal abuse? Has the child ever been in the car when Mommy or Daddy were drinking/drunk? Does the attending parent drink to excess or drive while under the influence?


I did inquire about domestic violence, how parents deal with their frustration when children are misbehaving, drug/alcohol use. I also asked teens about the behavior of their peers (drinking, drugs, sex, etc) and if they have been in the car with anyone who has been drinking.

TR - I asked if there were guns in the home and if the adults were comfortable handling them - I never lectured anyone about dangers or risks, but did suggest those who were uncomfortable consider getting some training.

Dozer - Thank you for your points about how little time there is to react to - and level of care needed for - an accidental gun wound.

While it is impossible to ask about every potentially harmful exposure a child has, some are more harmful (and more suddenly so) than others.

[The Reaper]

Doc, would it bother you (or any other physician) if I started grilling you about YOUR potentially risky behavior?

What kind of meds do you take? When do you take them?

Do you drink?

Do you ever see patients while you are still potentially under the influence of drugs or alcohol?

What are your sleep habits?

Do you have insomnia?

Do you ever see patients when you are not well-rested?

Are you in a monogamous relationship?

Are you HIV positive?

Are you gay?

You aren't a pedophile are you?

Do you engage in potentially risky sexual practices?

When was the last time your office was sterilized?

Have you ever been arrested? When and for what?

Have you ever been charged with any offense involving a minor?

Do you speed or violate other traffic laws?

Do you always wear your seat belt while in a motor vehicle?

Have all of your employees had background checks done?

Have you ever had a malpractice claim filed against you? For what? What was the disposition?

Could you tell me what your malpractice insurance limits are?

Have you ever declared bankruptcy?

What is your credit score?

Are you comfortable with your patient load?

Do you ever feel that you are seeing more patients than you have time for?


These questions could theoretically permit me to determine whether you would be the best, most qualified person to provide medical care for my children.

You wouldn't mind answering them for me would you?

Actually, I suspect you might. Some of them are personal questions. Like my firearms ownership status.

You can respect that, can't you?

TR

[PedOncoDoc]

Entire list of questions.

These questions could theoretically permit me to determine whether you would be the best, most qualified person to provide medical care for my children.

You wouldn't mind answering them for me would you?

Actually, I suspect you might. Some of them are personal questions. Like my firearms ownership status.

You can respect that, can't you?


I can respect that. Just as I respect your right to respond to my query with "That is none of your business, doc," before we move on to the next issue at hand. I feel I reserve the right to respond in similar fashion to a lot of those questions. If you have a problem with that answer from me, you are welcome to see someone else. I don't feel I should be able to refuse you my services because I don't agree with you.

I have never taken it personally when someone has asked to see another physician because they didn't care for my style. To think I would be the best fit as a doctor for every patient would be narcissistic - if not outright delusional.

I am not debating whether or not someone is obiligated to answer the question. Just whether or not a doctor can be forced or forbidden to ask the question.

[Sacamuelas]

Doc, would it bother you (or any other physician) if I started grilling you about YOUR potentially risky behavior?

You wouldn't mind answering them for me would you?

Actually, I suspect you might. Some of them are personal questions. Like my firearms ownership status.

You can respect that, can't you?

TR

TR-
I imagine he, I, or you would be frustrated. Being questioned that extensively in our workplace would be uncomfortable. However, I don't think pedoncodoc is or ever would suggest that if you attempted your proposed interrogation that it should be considered a felony offense. That is the ludicrous portion of this law.

I encourage questions by patients in my clinic, but I would defer answering that which I determined to be unnnecessary or frivolous. The patient has the same options. If this is an unacceptable situation for my patient after I explain my reasons... he/she can Vote with feet, wallet, or a combination. However, the real core of the issue is politicians broadly limiting a history/physical/exam with threats of felony charges. That's a joke.

Again, this is a failure of the profession to step in and provide some guidelines and factual information to its members to prevent laymen from treading into areas that they are ignorant. The politicians don't know any better.

[Red Flag 1]

It seems to me that there are two medical specialties that would be concerned about firearms in the home; that would be Peds and Psych. The psych link looks pretty direct to me. If a patient is suicidal, to not inquire about firearms in the home could well be seen in court as malpractice. I suppose the thinking could include rope and a ton of other things, and they do; but securing a firearm is pretty easy and should be addressed. That a law can be enacted to prevent this question is not a good idea IMHO.

The Peds link to a firearms question is a bit less obvious to some. It is well known that kids will find and use unsecured weapons as toys. I think the Pediatrician is well advised to point out to gun owners that that threat is real and present. While the Peds doc should be able to ask about firearms in the home, the parent can say thanks for the information without disclosing wether the are guns in the home or not. I don't think our Peds Doc here is going to go home and read his list of gun owners for entertainment late at night in a darkened room.

I am a gun owner. I am a NRA member. I practice with my firearms quite often. I have a CCW permit, and do at times go about my day armed. I don't think there should be a law enacted anywhere that would prevent a physician from asking a question relative to the safety of his/her patient. The issue of firearms is really a non-issue compared to the danger of DUI/DWI; the firearms issue is just easier to address.

Please notice that I did not say folks should be forced to answer questions about owning firearms. My point is that there is plenty reason to allow physicians to continue to ask about firearms in the home. I see the proposed law as restricting a practice necessary in some medical practices.

My $.02.

RF 1

[T-Rock]

If the AAP, APA, AMA, and Doctors Against Handgun Injury et al. had not politicized gun ownership as a public health epidemic, as if bullets were some sort of microorganism, I wouldn’t have thought too much about my Doc asking me if I had a gun in the house. However, since Dr. Richard Corlin dedicated the AMA in 2001 to battling gun ownership, I would definitely question the motives of my Doc if he were to ask any question pertaining to firearms, especially my dentist…

...Is it safe… :D


http://www.nraila.org/Legislation/Federal/Read.aspx?id=184
http://207.97.238.132/initiatives/dahi.shtml

[PedOncoDoc]

If the AAP, APA, AMA, and Doctors Against Handgun Injury et al. had not politicized gun ownership as a public health epidemic, as if bullets were some sort of microorganism, I wouldn’t have thought too much about my Doc asking me if I had a gun in the house. However, since Dr. Richard Corlin dedicated the AMA in 2001 to battling gun ownership, I would definitely question the motives of my Doc if he were to ask any question pertaining to firearms, especially my dentist…


Exactly why I've avoided the AMA, AAP and other professional organizations as they're not about the medicine and are about a politcal agenda.

Ironically AMA also means "Against Medical Advice" outside of medical politcs.


...Is it safe… :D

My screen, unfortunately, was not. Great Marathon Man reference! :D

[tonyz]

MOO, I would prefer that the state of Florida mind it's own business on this one.

If the medical professional has a legitimate medical reason for asking a question about firearms - then ask it.

If I don't like the question I am free to find another medical professional.

Moreover, IMHO, I should not be refused treatment by a medical professional for answering one way or the other. If the the proposed language in the proposed legislation were limited to protecting a patient's right to treatment regardless of whether they owned firearms or not - then perhaps this proposed legislation would be of some benefit.

If we continue to walk this path of increased government regulation - when there is a shift in political power in Florida - and the opposition party regains power - what stops them from proposing legislation mandating that ALL medical professionals MUST ask ALL patients about firearms ownership. Bullshit.

No, I want the state of Florida out of my doctor / patient relationship - for the most part these (legislators) are idiot bureaucrats that we are talking about. I don't want these bureaucrats deciding what can or what cannot be asked based on who is in power.

YMMV

[ZonieDiver]

MOO, I would prefer that the state of Florida mind it's own business on this one.

If the medical professional has a legitimate medical reason for asking a question about firearms - then ask it.

If I don't like the question I am free to find another medical professional.

Moreover, IMHO, I should not be refused treatment by a medical professional for answering one way or the other. If the the proposed language in the proposed legislation were limited to protecting a patient's right to treatment regardless of whether they owned firearms or not - then perhaps this proposed legislation would be of some benefit.

If we continue to walk this path of increased government regulation - when there is a shift in political power in Florida - and the opposition party regains power - what stops them from proposing legislation mandating that ALL medical professionals MUST ask ALL patients about firearms ownership. Bullshit.

No, I want the state of Florida out of my doctor / patient relationship - for the most part these (legislators) are idiot bureaucrats that we are talking about. I don't want these bureaucrats deciding what can or what cannot be asked based on who is in power.

YMMV

I agree.

It's been a lonnnng time since I was in a pediatrician's with either of my daughters as patients. I do recall our 2nd pediatrician in the DFW area asking such questions. She framed them well - mentioning their inquisitive nature. I took it that she was simply reminding me to be careful, since their mobility was changing. She did ask about pools and whether we'd 'childproofed' such things as alcohol and cleansers.

I didn't mind the questions, but I'm not sure if it was her friendly, folksy, informative, non-threatening manner - or the fact that she was drop-dead gorgeous and I wanted to stay there as long as I could that made it not matter. :D

[Dusty]

I agree.

I didn't mind the questions, but I'm not sure if it was her friendly, folksy, informative, non-threatening manner - or the fact that she was drop-dead gorgeous and I wanted to stay there as long as I could that made it not matter. :D

lol You're an honest man, Bro.

[ZonieDiver]

lol You're an honest man, Bro.

It was a lonely time in my life, and probably helps explain why I'm divorced today. :(

Seriously, she broached the subject with a discussion of child car seats, and took it from there. It was the way she approached it. I didn't feel insulted.

I was expecting an infant invasion this weekend by a suddenly VERY mobile and agile (but not hostile) grandson who is extremely inquisitive and has an ability to focus on things which he has been denied. I would have appreciated thoughtful advice as to how to keep him safer from anyone, especially my 'kid doc'!

[dr. mabuse]

*

[Tree Potato]

On the very rare occasion my son is really bugging me, I take away his gun privileges and make him listen to NPR or watch "Think" or the "Charlie Rose Show".

Works every damn time. ;)

^^^Now THAT is child abuse.^^^

Break break... gun ownership is not a medical condition, and the medical community treating it like one is sanctimonious drivel from a position of assumed moral authority.

[PedOncoDoc]

On the very rare occasion my son is really bugging me, I take away his gun privileges and make him listen to NPR or watch "Think" or the "Charlie Rose Show".

Works every damn time. ;)

Losing gun and archery priveleges works most of the time for my little guy, too. One time he was way out of control and he lost his name for a week. I only referred to him as, "boy." That one really got to him.

Now, if I ever call him boy when he's out of line he straightens right up.

[Shar]

I agree.

It's been a lonnnng time since I was in a pediatrician's with either of my daughters as patients. I do recall our 2nd pediatrician in the DFW area asking such questions. She framed them well - mentioning their inquisitive nature. I took it that she was simply reminding me to be careful, since their mobility was changing. She did ask about pools and whether we'd 'childproofed' such things as alcohol and cleansers.

I didn't mind the questions, but I'm not sure if it was her friendly, folksy, informative, non-threatening manner - or the fact that she was drop-dead gorgeous and I wanted to stay there as long as I could that made it not matter. :D

EVERY time I've taken my kids in for well-child, developmental visits to the local military care facility or to civilian facilities - I was asked about the safety in my home and my awareness of certain things. The most invasive places were the military care facilities, and while it annoyed me, I played along because I knew there were plenty of parents/families who were clueless and/or dangerous. I know I've been asked about weapons, medications, pools, stairs, smokers, and so on. I've been asked every question under the sun about my relationship with my husband the kid's relationship with their father. At Madigan, it is required that they ask about the patients mental well-being now, even if I'm in for a stubbed toe. Especially at military facilities they seem to be pretty darn nosy. But, like ZonieDriver said - I've never been offended because it's always been done in a "normal course of business" manner. I'm pretty sure a lot of times it's on a form I'm supposed to fill out also stating whether my kid can feed himself, go potty or jump up and down.

I don't see any problem with asking. JUST asking and providing a suggestion for continued safety if there is an issue. Awareness should be raised. This audience is primarily made up of gun trained/aware/knowledgeable individuals. I'm sure that all of your homes are safe, but there are very bad parents out there who are very bad gun owners/pet owners/car owners/med owners/pool owners and they scare me. It's why my kids aren't allowed to go to friend's houses unless I've personally been in the house and know the parents/siblings/pets well. People are dangerous - especially when they are stupid, so maybe by asking a question, stupidity is lessened.

[GratefulCitizen]

:confused:
Never had a firearms instructor ask about my medical condition/history...

Don't recall any visits to the doctor where he/she was the one asking the questions (unless specifically led).
I was always asking him/her the questions.

The doctor is my employee.
I require answers of my employee, my employee does not require answers from me.

[alelks]

Just throwing this out there. :)

US Gun Statistics
Various Sources
2-2-5


(A) The number of physicians in the U.S. is 700,000.
(B) Accidental deaths caused by Physicians per year are 120,000.
(C) Accidental deaths per physician is 0.171.

(Statistics courtesy of U.S. Dept. of Health Human Services)

Guns
(A) The number of gun owners in the U.S. is 80,000,000.
Yes, that is 80 million.

(B) The number of accidental gun deaths per year, all age groups, is 1,500.
(C) The number of accidental deaths per gun owner is 0.000188.

Statistically, doctors are approximately 9,000 times more dangerous than gun owners.
Remember, "Guns don't kill people, doctors do."

FACT: NOT EVERYONE HAS A GUN, BUT ALMOST EVERYONE HAS AT LEAST ONE DOCTOR.

Please alert your friends to this alarming threat. We must ban doctors before this gets completely out of hand!

Out of concern for the public at large, I have withheld the statistics on lawyers for fear the shock would cause people to panic and seek medical attention.

[nmap]

I haven't had that problem...perhaps because I have no children...perhaps because I live in Texas.

However, if it did occur, I would raise an eyebrow and lie through my teeth. Something to the effect of "Why, no, doctor, no, I don't have any guns. I abhor the gun culture and the violence it represents."

The concealed carry permit is nicely concealed behind my driver's license. :D

[alelks]

Heck,

If my doc would have had a problem with me conceal carrying into his clinic I would have found another doc. Now he conceal carries also.

[dr. mabuse]

*

[PedOncoDoc]

Heck,

If my doc would have had a problem with me conceal carrying into his clinic I would have found another doc. Now he conceal carries also.

Unfortunately, most (if not all) hospitals are "gun-free zones" - especially ones on university campuses such as my current place of service and I tend to obey the law. Hell, I catch flack from a majority of my colleagues for wearing a pocket knife that meets hospital policies (blade must be less than 3").

[98G]

Statistically, doctors are approximately 9,000 times more dangerous than gun owners.
Remember, "Guns don't kill people, doctors do."

FACT: NOT EVERYONE HAS A GUN, BUT ALMOST EVERYONE HAS AT LEAST ONE DOCTOR.

Please alert your friends to this alarming threat. We must ban doctors before this gets completely out of hand!

Out of concern for the public at large, I have withheld the statistics on lawyers for fear the shock would cause people to panic and seek medical attention.

These statistics might lead one to think that medical doctors should ask every medical relevant question they can in order to avoid a mis-diagnosis. This leaves less time for non-relevant questions, however well intended.

Pool safety, gun safety, defensive driving... the list of ways one can be careless is endless, but not medically important for a diagnosis and treatment -- unless it is a psychiatric visit and a question of direct danger to self and others. So while I would not outlaw the question, I would not expect a doctor to ask it.

In the end, we can't outlaw stupidity.

[Richard]

Strictly from a medical point-of-view and situationally dependent upon knowing the area and the patients where one is practicing - I can see where it would be an appropriate question to ask about and discuss with the patients the availability and security of weapons in a household where there are medically diagnosed ADHD impulsive children.

The same would apply with a number of potential hazards for children diagnosed with such a medical condition.

Richard :munchin

[Pete]

Unfortunately, most (if not all) hospitals are "gun-free zones" - especially ones on university campuses such as my current place of service and I tend to obey the law. Hell, I catch flack from a majority of my colleagues for wearing a pocket knife that meets hospital policies (blade must be less than 3").

And just what can you find in the OR that makes a better weapon than a folding 3" pocket knife?

I didn't know if I should put the above in pick - or to use any one of the many emoticons.

Sometimes I wonder if any who make the rules put any thought into it - or just feel good because they "did something to combat violence" when they passed the rule.

[Paslode]

I can see where it would be an appropriate question to ask about and discuss with the patients the availability and security of weapons in a household where there are medically diagnosed ADHD impulsive children.



Johnny is a rambunctious boy who day dreams Doc, what can we do.............lets try some Ritalin Mrs. Jones. Jane is upset her boyfriend dump her, what can we do....Paxil should get her over the hump Mrs. Jones.

That is a whole other topic unto itself, but in time all those kids on anti-depressants and ADD/ADHD drugs will be prevented from owning or participating in things that might cause injury.



In the end, we can't outlaw stupidity.


Through eugenics we can try...

[Richard]

Re Post #44 - Astounding!

Richard :munchin

[nmap]

Through eugenics we can try...

Hmm...is stupidity genetic? Now there is a fascinating question.

[Richard]

Hmm...is stupidity genetic? Now there is a fascinating question.

Oh, gawd!!!! Not again.

Richard :munchin

[Paslode]

Oh, gawd!!!! Not again.

Richard :munchin

:D

[Dusty]

Hmm...is stupidity genetic? Now there is a fascinating question.

Affirmative.

http://www.nbcsandiego.com/news/weird/Scientists-May-Have-IDd-Liberal-Gene-105917218.html


Researchers have determined that genetics could matter when it comes to some adults' political leanings.

According to scientists at UC San Diego and Harvard University, "ideology is affected not just by social factors, but also by a dopamine receptor gene called DRD4." That and how many friends you had during high school.

The study was led by UCSD's James Fowler and focused on 2,000 subjects from the National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent Health. Scientists matched the subjects' genetic information with "maps" of their social networks. According to researchers, they determined that people "with a specific variant of the DRD4 gene were more likely to be liberal as adults." However, the, subjects were only more likely to have leanings to the left if they were also socially active during adolescence.

"It is the crucial interaction of two factors -- the genetic predisposition and the environmental condition of having many friends in adolescence -- that is associated with being more liberal,” according to the study.

[Paslode]

Re Post #44 - Astounding!

Richard :munchin


I thought you might enjoy that.

[Iraqgunz]

Just like others before he was on the radar and he slipped through the cracks. Why wasn't anything done?

The gun is irrelevant. He is an adult and could have purchased the weaon without anyones knowledge. He could have also kept the weapon hidden on the property or in his room as well.

What happened was a tragedy, but I can assure you that if a federal judge and a politician wouldn't have been killed, there would have been much less noise out there.

Agreed - the tragedy probably would not have been averted. However, the gun control pols would have a weaker argument to further their cause for more restrictions.

[nmap]

Oh, gawd!!!! Not again.

Richard :munchin

I promise that I will not start a thread about it. :D

[Dozer523]

Oh, gawd!!!! Not again.
Richard :munchin
Huh?:rolleyes: