New (FL) law forbidding doctors to talk to patients about guns angers physicians

[Henry]

But being required to answer under threat of denial of medical services, that's ok than?

Of course. If I'm doing a job for someone and they refuse to answer a question about the job, I should be able to turn it down. Shouldn't I?

[Dan T.]

If that is the case, all the more reason to not answer the question. My 2nd amendment right will cost me more money in insurance premiums because my doctor asked me, I trusted and answered him and then he reported it to my insurance provider.

I'm not sure someone as paranoid as you should own a gun.

[Burgold]

But being required to answer under threat of denial of medical services, that's ok than?

#171

[LD0506]

Of course. If I'm doing a job for someone and they refuse to answer a question about the job, I should be able to turn it down. Shouldn't I?

An interesting stance, so what else should your pediatrician be empowered to demand answers to?

And don't assume I am taking a stand on this, I'm really just looking for clarification. I have a 7 yr old son so anything bearing on his safety and wellbeing catches my attention.

[DarrellsMyHero28]

From what I understand the number of cases of pediatricians dropping clients for this reason is miniscule. Now, the reason one gave in the case that was reported in this thread... that a doctor and their patients/guardians need to have a certain level of trust to properly take care of the kid makes a lot sense to me. They weren't dropped because they owned a gun, but because it's really hard to diagnose and treat if information is kept hidden.

Reminds me of House.

Personally, I don't believe dropping a patient over gun ownership is a violation of the second amendment. The second amendment guarantees gun ownership. It'd be a stretch to suggest that it also guarantees you a right to medical care even if you own a gun.

Personally I think it'd be ridiculous to drop a patient solely on the basis of their gun ownership. If you required them to take home a pamphlet on gun safety or attend a class or something I'd understand but dropping them seems like a complete overreaction.

[Henry]

An interesting stance, so what else should your pediatrician be empowered to demand answers to?

Whatever doesn't put him out of business?

I suspect if a doctor is unreasonably demanding with irrelevant personal questions and drops everyone who he doesn't get along with, he'll go out of business. That's capitalism for you. That's America.

Rather than letting the market dictate these things, Florida has decided to take a different approach.

[Burgold]

I agree, DMH28. I don't think clients should be dropped for that cause. I just thought that the logic used by the doctor in the one case presented to us was sound. A doctor and patient do need to be able to trust each other and accurately shared info can be very important in forming the right diagnosis. If a patient doesn't trust his doc and is only willing to answer questions the patient decides are immediately relevent than the doctor is operating somewhat blind

[Bang]

My argument is not that the law is wonderful and the way to go, it isnt. The government has no business in the issue EITHER way. I am taking issue with arguments that the dr has the right to ask and know that information. That his poking his nose where it doesnt belong is ok with so many. I know I can say "none of your business" and get a new physician, and probably would. But why is that his right to know? He is not some random guy on the street asking me that question. This is someone I have an intimate, personal realtionship with.

Bang, my intention was not to get into name calling. Just feel like you kind of started that one. I know what I am and what my ideals are, I just jumped to the "lib" assumption just like you assume to know what I am because of my thoughts on one topic on a message board. Again, the relationship between a doctor and a patient is very different from two people on the street. Information that does not pertain to my visit, I do not think he should be asking about. I am not advocating government takover as has been suggested. That is not who I am.

Sorry repo.. my name-calling is an extension of my outrage over this.

I am VERY angry about this, this is an actual real oppression of our first amendment rights. It's not a slippery slope, it's down the other side of the hill.

I cannot see how any American can stand for it.

I was purposely being outrageous in my outrage, hoping that it would show how clearly wrong this is.

So I promise I will calm down and be nice.

I will say though that in your first post in which you complained of the anti-republican sentiment.. that did set me off. The republicans swear this is against everything they believe, and yet it was a republican who did this. This is exactly the kind of thing that they use to scare people into believing the left wants to do.

It's is more than a lie, it's a betrayal, and one that flips the bird straight at the first amendment. (and at every conservative who supports them. It says "Go ahead sucker. You'll dance to any tune i play." and so many of them do without even thinking of anything but 'Yay my team! Go team go!"

I am center-right in my thinking. (I used to be considered further right back in the days of sanity)

The republicans are the only party i ever belonged to. (no longer a member)

I feel as though they have abandoned the principals of conservatism for a radical version of "do as i say"

I carry a lot of anger towards them,, but it isn't because I'm a liberal,, it's because they have changed.. the party has taken a VERY hard right turn and gone right off the deep end of Crazy Canyon.

I feel as if all of the conservative values I was brought up to believe are long gone, and in fact, many of them seem to be practiced these days by a lot more Dems than Reps.

In this case, i see a screaming meme turned into law. I don't think that the 'problem' of doctors refusing gun owners is a reality. I don't thin kthe majority of people feel as if they need a law to stop the doc from offering some gun safety tips, same as they would swimming pool safety if you own a pool.

Fact is, the doc may be a gun owner. He or she may suggest to you to check out the local NRA firearm safety info or shooting classes for kids.

The worry that he will instantly turn into Bill Maher and throw you out of his office is ridiculous.

I know it isnt a mandate. But with so many people working very hard to take that right from me, it just rubs me the wrong way. Even as a suggestion. And you just werent urging the right women.

the biggest lie in America.

No one is ever going to manage to take that right from you.

Ever.

Concern yourself more with the rights they DO take from you rather than the ones that propagandists like to pretend will be taken from you. As this topic shows, some rights are much easier to steal from you. The 2nd isn't going anywhere. The 1st.. well.. a piece of it was just chipped away in Florida.

~Bang

[Madison Redskin]

This just has a bad taste to me.

Fortunately, the First Amendment doesn't give a **** about bad taste.

[repo_4]

I'm not sure someone as paranoid as you should own a gun.

You must have just been sarcastic with the "pre-existing condition" remark and I just missed it.

[DarrellsMyHero28]

I agree, DMH28. I don't think clients should be dropped for that cause. I just thought that the logic used by the doctor in the one case presented to us was sound. A doctor and patient do need to be able to trust each other and accurately shared info can be very important in forming the right diagnosis. If a patient doesn't trust his doc and is only willing to answer questions the patient decides are immediately relevent than the doctor is operating somewhat blind

Agreed.

The doctor in that case could acting to protect himself from malpractice suits.

[Mad Mike]

Cut and pasted from an AAP document on injury protection:

-------------

For those who know of the dangers of guns but still keep a gun in the home.

Always keep the gun unloaded and locked up.

Lock and store the bullets in a separate place.

Make sure to hide the keys to the locked boxes.

---------

What part is unreasonable? The facts are unassailable. Guns are dangerous, and kids can get hurt by them. Parents should be aware of the risks. If they are aware of them and still want guns, then they should take measures to secure them so kids don't get into them. It would be great if every parent had adequate common sense so that these conversations would be unnecessary. The unfortunate fact that so many kids continue to get injured or killed proves that there are plenty of parents who recklessly expose their kids to guns. It is the pediatrician's mission and duty to protect kids' health. Not addressing guns would be an abdication of their responsibility.

I'm all for gun safety. And as stated I ABSOLUTELY support a doctors right to talk about the issue. But from a tactical standpoint, doing all three of those things would make the gun USELESS for home defense. By the time you found your keys, unlocked the two boxes in separate locations and got the gun loaded, you would be toast in a home invasion.

IMO. Use a trigger lock or safe, keep the keys well hidden and/or on your person, and keep the gun well hidden and out of reach of small children. In the end however, I think the exact method is not as important as how well you implement it.

[repo_4]

Sorry repo.. my name-calling is an extension of my outrage over this.

I am VERY angry about this, this is an actual real oppression of our first amendment rights. It's not a slippery slope, it's down the other side of the hill.

I cannot see how any American can stand for it.

I was purposely being outrageous in my outrage, hoping that it would show how clearly wrong this is.

So I promise I will calm down and be nice.

I will say though that in your first post in which you complained of the anti-republican sentiment.. that did set me off. The republicans swear this is against everything they believe, and yet it was a republican who did this. This is exactly the kind of thing that they use to scare people into believing the left wants to do.

It's is more than a lie, it's a betrayal, and one that flips the bird straight at the first amendment. (and at every conservative who supports them. It says "Go ahead sucker. You'll dance to any tune i play." and so many of them do without even thinking of anything but 'Yay my team! Go team go!"

I am center-right in my thinking. (I used to be considered further right back in the days of sanity)

The republicans are the only party i ever belonged to. (no longer a member)

I feel as though they have abandoned the principals of conservatism for a radical version of "do as i say"

I carry a lot of anger towards them,, but it isn't because I'm a liberal,, it's because they have changed.. the party has taken a VERY hard right turn and gone right off the deep end of Crazy Canyon.

I feel as if all of the conservative values I was brought up to believe are long gone, and in fact, many of them seem to be practiced these days by a lot more Dems than Reps.

the biggest lie in America.

No one is ever going to manage to take that right from you.

Ever.

Concern yourself more with the rights they DO take from you rather than the ones that propagandists like to pretend will be taken from you. As this topic shows, some rights are much easier to steal from you. The 2nd isn't going anywhere. The 1st.. well.. a piece of it was just chipped away in Florida.

~Bang

All is good my friend. I am always open to lively debate. As far as people taking that right being a "lie". You need to look into how many places in this country have laws that you cannot own/carry a handgun. I gave references to several cities that had completely banned owwnership until the Supreme Court ruling that overturned those laws. DC was one of the cities effected by that ruling if I remember correctly. So the push and desire to get rid of guns is alive and well.

[DarrellsMyHero28]

All is good my friend. I am always open to lively debate. As far as people taking that right being a "lie". You need to look into how many places in this country have laws that you cannot own/carry a handgun. I gave references to several cities that had completely banned owwnership until the Supreme Court ruling that overturned those laws. DC was one of the cities effected by that ruling if I remember correctly. So the push and desire to get rid of guns is alive and well.

Those laws will soon be off the books due to the SCOTUS ruling on the DC case.

[Dan T.]

You must have just been sarcastic with the "pre-existing condition" remark and I just missed it.

Yeah, I was just playing.

[Cept One]

Those laws will soon be off the books due to the SCOTUS ruling on the DC case.

DC still has a de facto ban in place... no gun stores and no FFL's = no legal way to obtain a firearm. The DC council has also passed a ton of requirements as well making it time consuming and expensive ($800) add that to the cost of the firearm and the inability of many people to find time to make repeated daytime trips to the local police dept. and you effectively prevent a majority of the population from owning guns.

[Bang]

All is good my friend. I am always open to lively debate. As far as people taking that right being a "lie". You need to look into how many places in this country have laws that you cannot own/carry a handgun. I gave references to several cities that had completely banned owwnership until the Supreme Court ruling that overturned those laws. DC was one of the cities effected by that ruling if I remember correctly. So the push and desire to get rid of guns is alive and well.

Small local governments have gone both ways.. there have been restrictions, and there have also been plenty of places that carry laws were expanded,, concealed carry, places where you may carry have expanded... so it's a trade-off in that realm at this point.

I see it like this.

On the federal level the 2nd is well defended. The defenders of it are never going to let their vigilance down.

the last attempt made on the pet "assault weapon ban" was made while the dems had the super majority, and they voted it down. (and instead voted to allow carrying a firearm into a national park. But if you listen to the average braniwashed fool, they swear Obama is coming by himself at 3 this afternoon to confiscate their guns. Reality doesn't jive with that fear and that fear is how these Republicans drive legislation like this monstrosity in FLA)

Contrary to popular right wing talkbox belief, plenty of Democrats proudly exercise their second amendment rights.

On the local level these fights will be made about all sorts of things.. sometimes the gun control advocates win one, sometimes the gun rights advocates win one.

the push to ban guns is always going to exist. But it won't win.

I am not a gun guy. Don't like them. (But, I do like shooting them. It's fun) But I fully support your and my right to own and keep them. I may support some ideas on some restrictions, but never support anyone wanting to ban them from law abiding Americans.

I do not agree with legislating against people asking about them, or standing on a soapbox downtown and saying they wish guns were banned, or handing out NRA pamphlets on gun safety or gun advocacy.. I support their right to do that as much as I support our right to firearms, if not moreso. The first amendment is much easier to strip.

~Bang

[twa]

More from the article:

No need to assume. Just read the article.

I did read it....the assuming is related to whether he is being entirely truthful.

declining a patient over warnings he could give w/o even knowing the status of gun possession leaves me a bit skeptical we are getting the whole truth

why the need to ask it at all if a positive just brings standard warnings?:paranoid:

simpler to just lie .

treat it like your wife asking "does make me look fat?"

truth is not worth the hassle sometimes

[DarrellsMyHero28]

DC still has a de facto ban in place... no gun stores and no FFL's = no legal way to obtain a firearm. The DC council has also passed a ton of requirements as well making it time consuming and expensive ($800) add that to the cost of the firearm and the inability of many people to find time to make repeated daytime trips to the local police dept. and you effectively prevent a majority of the population from owning guns.

Well, unfortunately for DC gun owners the constitution doesn't really address those issues. Right to bear arms =/= right to easily and inexpensively buy them.

[Larry]

I know it isnt a mandate. But with so many people working very hard to take that right from me, it just rubs me the wrong way.

Have you considered the possibility that maybe all those people are trying to take away your guns, because of your strongly demonstrated tendency towards paranoid behavior? :halo:

[Special K]

Cut and pasted from an AAP document on injury protection:

Peer reviewed medical and scientific journals are frowned upon by many internet posters...just trying to save you a lot of "cut and paste"/providing valid links to legitimate studies time...

[grego]

i'm very pro-first amendment (and lean conservative, generally), but i'm not so outraged about this. but- thats probably cuz i havent sufficiently read up on it. i admit it sounds weird to me for a dr to be asking if i have guns. he may as well be asking me about my favorite color.

now, i dont go to the dr very often (just had my first overnight stay in a hospital 2 months ago ), so there may be a reason i dont get it. i'll have to read up on the thread and figure out whats going on here. imagine that!

[repo_4]

Have you considered the possibility that maybe all those people are trying to take away your guns, because of your strongly demonstrated tendency towards paranoid behavior? :halo:

Have you considered the possibility that I demonstrate tendency towards paranoid behavior BECAUSE of all of those people trying to take away my guns? When a right you have is under seige (which this one is, regardless of what anyone says) you lose it the minute you stop defending it. The 2nd Amendment is well defended and funded but there are just as many well funded people trying to take that right away.

[zoony]

which came first, the paranoid freak or the gun?

[twa]

The paranoid...main driver for inventing them

You ever met a Chinese man that wasn't?