Posted on 08/05/2013 8:40:00 AM PDT by jazusamo
Physicians have no business interrogating patients about their guns
In the wake of the George Zimmerman verdict, President Obama and other anti-gun advocates have called for changing Florida’s pro-Second Amendment laws. Their chances of getting the “stand your ground” statute overturned are slim, but the anti-gun groups are making significant progress in the Sunshine State in allowing activist doctors to push their agenda to disarm families.
A federal appeals court heard oral arguments on July 18 in the case that has become known as “Docs vs. Glocks.” The issue before the court is whether a patient’s right to privacy and protection from doctors who ask inappropriate political questions about what firearms are in the family home trumps the health care providers’ rights to ask and to keep records of whatever they want.
The Firearm Owners Privacy Act, which Gov. Rick Scott signed into law in June 2011, says that doctors should not ask families about whether they own guns. But if they choose to do so, and a patient feels the doctor has harassed or discriminated against them, he can file a complaint with the medical board so that the doctor’s peers can decide if the accusation is legitimate.
“The wording in the law is ‘should refrain,’” Florida Solicitor General Allen Winsor told the justices of the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, according to The Associated Press.”It’s not mandating anything. It’s recommending. The use of the term is critical in this case.”
The issue came about after repeated cases surfaced of children being asked by doctors if there was a gun in the home. During the legislative process, one mother said her pediatrician refused to continue treating her child if she did not respond to questions about firearms at home.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtontimes.com ...
medical records have been getting transcribed for years
unless your doctor is in the country and has no computer access, your records have been entered in some form or another.
whether or not they are in full compliance with 0bamacare is a different issue. all medical records are in various degrees of compliance already
The people are just getting what they deserve.
Private medicine has been delivering the goods for more than 100 years.
But, people want it free, and they want it perfect, and always risk-free. All three are not possible in the real world.
So what do they do? They appeal to the government and try to enact the impossible, also known as socialism. Thereby punishing the doctors, and cutting off their own noses to spite their faces.
So be happy, people! This government micromanagement and screwing up an excellent system is exactly what you wanted. Enjoy!
Correct
Went to that link and received a “404 Error - Does not exist”.
Went to that link and received a “404 Error - Does not exist”.
. . . . .
Remove the “/” at the end of the URL and it will work. . .
http://www.2asisters.org/PhysicianAffidavit.pdf
Thank you!
It’s called regulation and “standard of care”— docs are more conservative than the GOP senate. So the government can’t make YOU do things you don’t want to do? Well go ahead and get nasty to your doctor. Knock yourself out.
Go ahead. Grab the iPad and run! Sometimes FRs can be so idiotic I think they must be liberal plants.
Just say no with no expressed emotion. All those other evasions and reactions will register as an imputed ‘yes’.
Maybe just not get hostile? Do you think your astonishing autogiro is the first he’s encountered?
“...“non-applicable in this context” and move on....”
You’re still telling them in the affirmative; a non-gun owner wouldn’t answer like that. At worst he’d write you as a “Probable”.
I say answer them like a lib would - get offended at the mere SUGGESTION of it. You give them nothing that way. They get to feel good, you keep your privacy, and everybody goes home happy.
All warfare is based on deception. Why give your enemy any free intel?
Precisely. See my post at 19 and 52.
Don’t give them any indication whatsoever.
“In a completely unrelated development, all medical records are to be stored electronically and made accessible to the Federal government. So medical records would be as good as a registry.”
In Californicating you land, electronic medical records are heading towards their third year after being mandated or strongly suggested.
Besides your medical records, your ss #, California driver’s license and insurance cards have been scanned into the records.
So anything else that you have “volunteered” or coerced into saying/writing down is also available electronically.
Anyone, who believes that those details in their so called confidential medical records haven’t been scanned by the NSA, FBI, TAF and IRS should buy a nice bridge from me.
“...In due time enough people people will simply start...”
Doubtful. That’s called “murder”, you do know that...?
Our current doctor said she will never ask about firearms. Her husband is in the military and many of her clients are TRICARE insured.
My doctor and I usually talk guns when I visit for checkups. He is usually looking for another WWII rifle or pistol for his collection.
I had one doc 20 yrs. ago who carried concealed on the job. He was a great guy, got killed in a car accident.
“Is there a state where the doctor can compel you to answer these questions? “
The problem is with the increasing number of docs bailing out of medicine. There means less and less practicing mds.
If you are over 65, finding a new doctor if your longtime doc retires, can really be tough as many docs aren’t taking new Medicare patients.
So poing a doc might get you dropped from his/her practice. Then your record will probably indicate that you were a hothead and unpredictable re your guns and your life style.
“...said she will never ask about firearms. ..”
And the doctor COULD just write an automatic standard “No” for anyone coming in, and it stops it in its tracks. There’s always ways around it. Civil disobedience comes in many forms.
I’d say it comes down to knowing what side your doc is on...like anything else.
They’re the same as any other group of society; a proportion are pro, some are anti, and some are indifferent, but will do as told - or just won’t.
This is an excellent suggestion. Our trust attorney is a conservative female, who hunted with her dad.
“Do what I did. Set up a “gun trust”, a legal entity spelled out in a document. Put your title 1 firearms in Appendix A, your Title 2 firearms in Appendix B.
When any agent of the government asks you, “Do you own (or have) any firearms?”.
Legally and ethically you can say, “No. I do not own any firearms, nor do I have any”. (That is the truth, because your Gun Trusts owns/has them). “
I will be looking into this and will be letting our younger relatives know this. They need a trust anyway.
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.