We went to him to discuss our medical concerns and then he could identify safety issues that were relevant to those concerns. There were an immense number of potential safety issues that we never discussed. For example, getting hit by a train even though there were train tracks near our house. My pediatrician would have known that that job was the responsibility of my parents.
Responsible parents that own firearms are aware that accidents can happen with a firearm just like any number of dangerous objects in their home. They do not need a physician to educate them about that fact. There are already a wealth of resources and options readily available to those parents. And criminals are not going to discuss storing their illegal firearms used in crimes with doctors.
My pediatrician never asked us about firearms because he left his political views at home where they belonged. The current debate over the ownership and use of firearms is taking place in legislatures and courts around our nation. That is where that debate belongs, not in our doctors' offices. Professional speech for healthcare workers is properly limited in order to ensure that they do not interject their personal political desires into their professional relationships.
Dr. Saunders exemplifies why these limits are necessary with political statements like "As much as the NRA and its ilk want to deny it, having a gun in the home is a risk factor for serious injury or death." or "By upholding this disgraceful law, the 11th Circuit Court has demonstrated allegiance to an ideology that favors the Second Amendment..." Do your patients a favor doc and keep your political ideology out of your professional practice.
Just tell them, “Why don’t you break in tonight and see.”
FACTS TO PONDER :
(A) The number of physicians in the U.S. is 700,000.
(B) Accidental deaths caused by Physicians per year are120,000.
(Calculation) Accidental deaths per physician is 0.171.
Statistics courtesy of U.S. Dept of Health Human Services
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Now think about this:
Guns:
(A) The number of gun owners in the U.S. is 80,000,000.
(Yes, that’s 80 million..)
(B) The number of accidental gun death per year, all age groups, is 1,500.
(Calculation) The number of accidental deaths per gun owner is .000188.
Statistics courtesy of FBI
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
So, 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.
From: Truth or fiction.com
And the patient has the right to refuse to answer.
That said, I talk about guns with my Doc all the time, mostly because one or the other of us will have bought a new one between visits.
Ask him immediately if he's a homosexual pedophile. That should shut him up. If he asks again, attack again.
Never play their games. Always hit them back twice as hard as they hit you.
That's nice Doc. Since our time together in the exam room will likely be short, howzabout you just deal with the problem(s) that caused me to visit you in the first place, mmmkay? You're not my overseer, you're a physician. Do what I'm paying you to do - diagnose and treat physical problems.
I remind the “good doctor” that the NRA is an organization devoted to safety whereas the Amer Acad of Pediatrics seems increasingly interested in political advocacy and less and less interested in childrens’ health.
BS. None of these "professionals" need to inquire about individual ownership if safety were truly their motivation.
They could simply offer their safety tips without knowing who owns what. That would be mildly annoying, but if they aren't probing for personal info, then there's no threat of ulterior motives.
After all, a non gun owner parent might have relatives with firearms, so visiting grandma or bitter clinger Uncle Bob would be "risky". A a non gun owner parent might buy a gun long before he or she brings the little tyke in for another appointment, so looky there, more parents flying right under this doctor's gun radar. Etc.
So, if this guy is truly concerned about the children, he would give his generic gun safety spiel to all parents without the probing questions, but...
Do they ask whether they have a swimming pool? Do they ask whether they have a gas grill? Do they ask whether they have a fireplace? Do they ask whether they have stairs? Do they ask whether they keep a gasoline can in the garage? Do they ask whether they have candles?
If they are only asking about a firearm, then the motive is other than “to keep the children safe”, IMHO.
http://www.2asisters.org/PhysicianAffidavit.pdf
have them sign this form - it should make them pucker HARD
Bullsh!t.
If that were the case, the author would also question the parents closely about usage of safety belts and child safety seats when driving, usage of proper headgear when riding a bicycle or tricycle, the presence and accessibility of swimming pools in the neighborhood, the presence of unattended five-gallon buckets in the home, and so on... because a legitimate interest in safety involves all these things. They are all as dangerous or more dangerous to children than are guns.
The absence of such questions from the doctor's interview is, on the face of it, evidence that the gun question isn't driven by a concern for safety. And if I had to pick a choice for the reason why it's there, politics would be my top pick.
“My pediatrician never asked us about firearms because he left his political views at home where they belonged.”
You have stated the issue EXACTLY right! `Docs vs Glocks’ isn’t about safety, it’s about gun control & abuse of one’s professional authority.
And.....if Obamacare advances to its final conclusion, patient records will become government dossiers on citizens, with physicians as informants.
Again, well stated.
So we have trained journalists who can’t differentiate a shotgun from an AR or a Glock from a revolver and now, on the basis of some kids description of what might be a power drill or a hair dryer, a medical professional is going to be able to report the presence of a gun in a house.
Cool plan.
That's about all I need to know--doesn't even have the guts to use his own name. Oh, and good to see he's an expert on gay rights . . .
Well, there's his problem right there. He doesn't even understand his own purpose.
Rightly understood, his one straightforward professional obligation is TO PROVIDE MEDICAL CARE.
Period.
Does this pediatrician also ask teens about their driver training? Does he ask about swimming lessons? Does he discuss the danger of lightening, or hiking in the desert without enough water, or any one of 10,000 other NON-MEDICAL ways of getting hurt?
I doubt it. This is about gun-grabbing, and trying to shame people into getting rid of their guns.
Now, if he asked because he wanted to recommend a high capacity 45 automatic, or to discuss the advantages of shotguns vs repeating rifles vs handguns for keeping safe in the home, then I’d believe him...
Your freedom to say what you want is protected.
Your parents have the right to have guns.
It's nobody’s business.
Dr. Saunders exemplifies why these limits are necessary with political statements like “As much as the NRA and its ilk want to deny it, having a gun in the home is a risk factor for serious injury or death.”
*************************************
If he wants to talk RISK FACTORS for serious injury/death .... so is a hot stove or an electrical socket. So is a compost pile with sticks in it (my little brother jumped into one out of a tree and ended up with a stick stuck in his forehead, just missed putting his eye out). So are FAMILY PETS - how many kids are bitten by dogs/cats & scratched? You can get some nasty stuff from pets. So are STEPS and bunk beds. How about sharp knives in the drawers & baseball bats? How about kids who hang themselves with belts, bedsheets, rope, etc.? And it goes on and on ..... Dr. S is full of B.S. as to his motives, IMO.