Posted on 06/15/2013 7:19:49 AM PDT by Gen.Blather
I had a disturbing conversation with a therapist about reporting/seizing patient’s guns. It revolved around the recent FR article reporting a 72 year old man had his musket collection seized because his therapist requested it. (A link would be appreciated.)
We’ll call the therapist Bill. Bill: “A therapist must follow the ethical guidelines of the practice plus any state laws. So, if the patient had expressed any suicidal ideation or depression, the therapist may be obligated to report this and the weapons will be seized.”
Me: “Do you think that might damage the trust relationship with the therapist?”
Bill shrugged and rolled his eyes. “Probably, but it’s a requirement. The therapist has no choice.”
Me: “It seems then that the relationship with the therapist isn’t one between medical professional and patient, but between the therapist and the government. Where does the therapist’s loyalty lie?”
Bill: (This is reduced to carry the flavor without being an exact quote.) “The therapist is a required to follow the law. The law differs from state to state.”
Me: “Do you think there may be an agenda where the therapist doesn’t like guns or gun owners?”
Bill: “It’s certainly possible. But without knowing any of the details, I can’t say.”
Me: “Do you think having the government swoop in and search your house and seize your property might have a negative psychological impact on the patient?”
Bill: (Again, a shrug.) “You do what the law and the ethical standards require.”
Me: “It seems to me that anybody who was honest with a therapist is an idiot.”
Bill: “It may lead to people not being open with their therapist, yes.”
In a side note, Bill said that the patient’s records belong to the therapist but the contents of the record belong to the patient. (Really fine delineation, but he was trying to get at patient privacy. But if he sends the sheriff to your house to search it, then what is the privacy worth?) Several years ago, I worked on a classified project. A woman employee had experienced a nervous breakdown and was “temporarily” removed from the project. She’d been with the same group for 25 years and they were family to her. She wanted back. They pulled the bureaucratic slow-roll on her, assuring her she’d be back when the paperwork cleared. But they had no intention of reinstating her clearance. One day I walked up on a conversation where the program’s security officer was reading from this lady’s medical record and they were having a good laugh. I was appalled. Nobody had any right to see that psychology report and less still to discuss it with other employees. Classified project people tend to see the world in us vs. them terms. This poor lady was no longer “us” and had become, therefore, “them.” Because this lady didn’t get her clearance reinstated they laid her off.
This experience has colored how I see doctors and the security establishment.
How does it impact your employability when you’ve officially had your weapons seized?
“Bottom line: don’t talk to a witch doctor psycho-ologist.”
Agree. The MOMENT you confide a potential to any type of doctor or shrink, you put yourself at great risk. If you own guns, or want to own guns, you can consider that option being closed out to you. If you have kids and they are identified as having issues (rightly or wrongly), you can kiss goodbye their gun rights.
It’s a two-way street when it comes to stuff like this, and people needing help are going to THINK VERY HARD before getting it (although I’m convinced something like 90% or more of the customers of shrinks don’t need help at all, it’s just that they want someone to talk to and have money and/or insurance).
“There was a time when “therapists” were called something else; family, friends, wise old neighbors, ministers etc. They were far more effective back then than they are today. Cheaper too.”
SO TRUE. Being married to an immigrant, the term “therapist” doesn’t even exist in her vocabulary, or her extended family’s vocabulary. They DEAL WITH their problems themselves, or together, and they don’t need pills every 5 minutes of the day also.
America was once like that.
“If your GP asks you about your guns, just tell him you are only there for your broken thumb or whatever and nuthin’ else.”
Agree with everything you said but this.
If you’re asked, SIMPLY LIE (if you do have guns). In other words, say you don’t own any, particularly if they don’t have a paper trail to you. ANYTHING ELSE, like “none of your goddamn business” or “let’s not talk about that” actually puts in a worse boat than telling the truth, for not only are you a gun owner, you are one of those dangerous Tea Party types.
Today’s world is different. We MUST LIE and especially our KIDS MUST LIE to get by. We have an army of social workers, shrinks, liberals, gun-grabbers - whatever that are READY TO POUNCE if they can just get themselves an angle - like a kid who tells a teacher than dad spanks him. You MUST TRAIN both yourself and your kids to LIE - it’s not easy, we’re not Democrats, but the days of being treated in a just manner for lawful activities have, essentially, ended.
I’m a Vietnam vet & getting highly suspicious of docs/nurses asking VERY leading questions about how I am getting along, have I got any “issues” (when what is meant is problems), and which have nothing to do with “how would you describe your current state of health”.
Especially VA & state voc rehab with their questions. Guns aren’t on the questionaire yet but detailed questions about one’s drinking habits are (hint: more than 2 oz a week makes you a `heavy drinker’).
And of course, flippant or defiant answers mean that your attitude is noted. Under your social security number.
Psychoprofessionals are not only unintelligent about what goes on in someone else’s mind, but they are borderline psychopathic themselves, JMHO.
“Despite the acuity of the patients I often deal with, there are relatively few times I have had to involve the authorities. Never has a patient of mine gone on the use a firearm to kill themselves or anyone else, that I know of - knock on wood. And a handful of patients have - either then, or at a later point - thanked me for handling the matter in this way.”
The difference is that you’re on this site, which means you’re predisposed to protect people’s privacy and right. I doubt that’s the case with most people in the shrink world, at least if the psych majors that I went to school with at ESU are any indication - they were radical as hell.
So I do think that most of the advice on this thread holds, unless the person is lucky enough to be seeing you, or manages to find someone similar.
How about we call it “redirecting” your response. Or the ever in vogue “repurposing” your answer. We don’t want to outright call you a liar. LOL!
“How about we call it “redirecting” your response. Or the ever in vogue “repurposing” your answer. We don’t want to outright call you a liar. LOL!”
No, it’s lying. We told our kids that if they want to get a new set of parents, all they have to do is tell some nice adult (cop, teacher, social worker) about how we apply discipline. And to make it clear, we make sure they understand it is FINE TO LIE in those circumstances.
And we tell them what the circumstance may be. A typical scenario is the kid is isolated with the social workers and they tell him that all he has to do is rat out his parents and everything will be JUST FINE. Of course the exact opposite is true - by keeping quiet, he gets his parents back - ratting them out means new mom and new dad. It’s a tough situation for an adult and very tough for a kid, but that is how they must be raised in our Brave New World.
You missed a critical one in there. How many pharmaceuticals *might* have psychological side effects?
“The use of psychotropic drugs by adult Americans increased 22 percent from 2001 to 2010, with one in five adults now taking at least one psychotropic medication, according to industry data.” - APA
Percent of persons using at least one prescription drug in the past month: 48.5% (2007-2010).
Common and infrequent psychological side effect to *non* psychotropic prescription drugs *may* include: depression, anxiety, hallucinations, insomnia, amnesia, vision and other sensory problems, compulsive behavior, suicidal ideation (suicidal thoughts), paranoia, anger or rages, addiction, and loss of inhibition.
A problem with this theory is that it assumes that people are naturally balanced, and this may only be half true.
To explain, I like to use some Oriental Yin-Yang theory, which stripped of any mythical context is a model that looks at living bodies, human and animal, as dynamic systems.
Yin, in this case, is energy uptake, and the systems that uptake energy. Yang is waste output, and the systems that get rid of waste. So, for example, when you breathe, Yin is the inhalation bringing in fresh oxygen, and Yang is the exhalation, getting rid of waste carbon dioxide.
In Oriental medicine, they think it is important that the bodies systems *as a whole* are balanced between Yin and Yang. However, to get movement through the system, you must have imbalance, with internal organs having varying Yin and Yang functions.
For example, the lungs are mostly Yin, because they need to bring in a lot of oxygen. But getting rid of CO2 is minor compared to that. Conversely, the large intestines are just the opposite, mostly devoted to extruding waste, mostly Yang; but at the same time, squeezing out much of the water in it for recycling.
In any event, the other organs have both Yin and Yang functions as well, to varying degrees. By themselves they are imbalanced, but as a group they are balanced.
And this same theory applies to emotions and psychology. To have a balanced emotional and psychological life, you have to have internal imbalances to keep the system functional.
Some people in normal, stable relationships feel compelled to start emotional arguments at intervals “to keep things moving” or to “clear the air”, having sensed emotional stagnation that could cause greater problems down the road.
But underlying it all is a very important Oriental medical truism: “If the patient thinks that something is wrong, even if you can’t find anything wrong, something *is* wrong.”
Thanks for the article link Irenic.
Wow! What a horrible nightmare of a story. I hope that Mr. Lovi gets a fair hearing in his case against the *warrantless* seizure of his guns by the police.
Every gun owner in the U.S. should read this article. It PROVES that there is a legitimate concern that “health care professionals” (along with any other nanny state officials) and the police can abuse their authority, resulting in the violation of the 2nd Amendment rights of citizens.
The lesson that I take from this:
1. I will NEVER disclose to anyone *that I don’t know and trust*, who asks out of the blue, that I have access to a weapon.
2.I will NEVER agree to allow police that show up *uninvited* into my home without a WARRANT.
It's in civil court now. The judge will run interference for the state to prevent him from recovering money damages, but he got his guns back.
A corollary to your lesson about how to handle the police, never do anything voluntarily, not even when they threaten you. I don't mean to resist or show disrespect, just don't cooperate or volunteer. If you capitulate to intimidation, it is recorded as a volitional act on your part, even when it isn't.
You can't beat the man. The best you can do is avoid their interest. But, if you draw their interest, make them do their job by the book.
Just choose a word to redefine. For example, "guns" is the term for large guns used on naval vessels. I have no guns, and do not have access to any guns. This is how the NSA answers when it is asked about "collecting." It says that possession of information is not collecting, it becomes collecting only when the NSA views the information stored in its warehouse.
Anyway, just be creative in parsing words and sentences. There is no such thing as "too ridiculous."
I agree 100% with all your points, especially with regards to interactions with the police.
Sad, but true...
Thanks for having the courage to post a comment here. I commend you for stating that you work hard not to violate patient confidentiality by involving police authorities in situations like this.
But, I hope that you realize that not everyone in your profession may rise to that standard, and instead give in to their misguided and prejudiced notion that they can “make the world a better place” by doing any thing they can to rid anyone of “evil guns”.
I strongly recommend that you make every effort to bring this topic up for discussion within your profession ranks at all possible levels; that it is extremely *unprofessional* to allow personal prejudices and/or biases to violate patient confidentiality.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.