Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: holden
This raises a big question:
Who employs the doctor? The patient or the government?

This, I think, marks the end of doctor/patient confidentiality; and I seriously wonder as to the integrity of attorney/client privilege.

13 posted on 07/12/2013 7:43:05 PM PDT by OneWingedShark (Q: Why am I here? A: To do Justly, to love mercy, and to walk humbly with my God.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: OneWingedShark
Who employs the doctor? The patient or the government?

Whoever pays them employs them. That's the way it's been since they used to make house calls in the 1950's.

23 posted on 07/12/2013 7:50:01 PM PDT by elkfersupper ( Member of the Original Defiant Class)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies ]

To: OneWingedShark

I was even discussing the confessional with my parents.

What if the priest is carrying a phone with him.
He may be unwittingly allowing “others” to listen in without knowing it.


35 posted on 07/12/2013 7:58:58 PM PDT by Scotswife
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies ]

To: OneWingedShark
By such action, the government clearly is acting as if it has invasive rights to this kind of information that was previously considered doctor-patient confidential.

Ladies and gentlemen, we've arrived at a point where the government has violated The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures. No Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

Since the government has no Constitutional right to seizure of our personal information, it has no right to act on the basis of information gained unlawfully.

Following the Constitution used to be engrained in American Citizens, such that they would do things in accord therewith as a matter of course. Going forward, this will be coerced and acquiesced to, as the GOP has acquiesced to their subservient, unable-to-impeach status.

Physicians are hereby ripped from their previous relationships of confidentiality and following the Constitution and turned into Constitution-abusing snitches, doing great harm to their patients. They should rebel, which of course under the NDAA will be considered a "belligerent act" (See belligerentact.org).

Or are We the People going to do something about it?

HF

40 posted on 07/12/2013 8:01:27 PM PDT by holden (Alter or abolish it yet?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies ]

To: OneWingedShark

A person still has a right to refuse any medical treatment that they want. My plan is to stand on that right along with the 5th amendment right.

I started this years ago. When they ask me to step on the scales, I just look them straight in the eye, smile, and say no thank you, I’ll pass on that.


83 posted on 07/12/2013 9:07:01 PM PDT by greeneyes (Moderation in defense of your country is NO virtue. Let Freedom Ring.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies ]

To: OneWingedShark
Who employs the doctor? The patient or the government?

It won't matter after Obamacare.

Ronald Reagan nailed it perfectly when he shared this observation. You can’t socialize the doctors without socializing the patients.

112 posted on 07/13/2013 5:21:35 AM PDT by MosesKnows (Love many, trust few, and always paddle your own canoe.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson