Judge Bars Enforcement Of Gun Gag Bill on health care providers

This is a discussion on Judge Bars Enforcement Of Gun Gag Bill on health care providers within the The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion forums, part of the Related Topics category; Whtat's the first principle of the Hippocratic Oath...? First, do no harm. ISTM they are looking to harm the integrity of the family (some parents ...

Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 31 to 45 of 69
Like Tree25Likes

Thread: Judge Bars Enforcement Of Gun Gag Bill on health care providers

  1. #31
    Distinguished Member Array BadgerJ's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Mid-Atlantic
    Posts
    1,379
    Whtat's the first principle of the Hippocratic Oath...?

    First, do no harm. ISTM they are looking to harm the integrity of the family (some parents would get angry if the kid 'told' on them. My dad threatened me and said I had to keep the stuff that goes on in the house to myself - of course this was in the 50s. I got a beating for telling I was getting beaten.)

    So, agree - the Docs have a hard enough time doing simple stuff like hand-washing between patients and not spreading nosocomial infection, and mis-diagnosing and not listening to the patient, they don't need to be some kind of socialist-state nanny.
    Eagleks likes this.

  2. Remove Ads

  3. #32
    VIP Member
    Array ctr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Shenandoah Valley in Virginia
    Posts
    2,331
    Quote Originally Posted by beni View Post
    Then that Medical Professional is violating HIPPA and you should sue him for all that he owns.
    Not always true. Doctors are required to report information to local, state, and federal agencies, depending on the circumstances. Doctors also report detailed information about a patient's visit, exam, and tests to insurance carriers, and in some cases, Medicare and Medicaid.

    When patients see specialist withing a health care network, or hospital system, the specialist has complete and unrestricted access to your health records that are stored in the system, also known as an EMR (Electronic Medical Record). So do to the coders and transcribers, billers, and numerous other folks involved in the process. You might be shocked to know how many folks actually have access to patient healthcare records.

    In October of 2013 life will get even more interesting with the mandate of ICD10, requiring significantly more information about a patients condition. Obama Care and the Electronic Portable Health record are quickly eroding privacy as well.

    HIPPA only protects a patient after the fact, as in after the disclosure.
    Hopyard and Tzadik like this.

  4. #33
    VIP Member
    Array ctr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Shenandoah Valley in Virginia
    Posts
    2,331
    Quote Originally Posted by bigmacque View Post
    Well in your stated context I certainly understand the use of that analogy, I can see your point. I guess my opinion is just tainted by the background of this whole issue. Prior to someone, i.e. Brady anti-group, insurance companies (the guys the doctors really work for -- that's where they get their paychecks), anyone else, bringing this up, it was a non-issue. I'd like to see it stay a non-issue.
    Actually, no, doctors don't work for insurance companies. Many doctors today are paid on salary by a healthcare system, or hospital system. Basically, a large non profit organization. Laywers, frivolous lawsuits, and high mal-practice insurance premiums have forced many doctors out of private practice.

    Note too, that patients that actually pay are supporting the patients that don't or can't pay their bills. Every wonder why aspirin costs $10 per pill from a hospital?

  5. #34
    VIP Member
    Array oneshot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    +42.893612,-082.710236 , Mi.
    Posts
    8,015
    Quote Originally Posted by ChrisMia View Post
    I don't buy that analogy. Out of the four things you mentioned, tell me which is the only one inherently dangerous by design . . .

    But that's beside the point. Statistically speaking, I would venture to say that parental negligence as it relates to swimming pools and firearms cause more injuries to children than scissors and toasters. Not saying that the problem is the pool or the gun - still a parental negligence problem. At the end of the day I think the point is to remind parents to be vigilant about keeping common household hazards from injuring their kids or worse. It's not, "are there guns in your house? Yes? Well then, you need to get rid of those guns, I can't see you if you have guns in your house, you're an irresponsible parent," etc. Even responsible people can use occasional reminders about proper safeguarding practices - why else do we share videos and stories of ND's and the like here? OMO/YMMV

    Like I said before, I think the discussion can help facilitate greater awareness of safe storage and ownership practices. It's easy for people like us who carry and are more "into" our ownership to lose sight of it, but there are millions of Americans who buy a gun for home protection and think that just owning it will be good enough. There's a startling lack of familiarity among such folks, who are also often the types that don't put any range time in, or maintain their weapons, or store them properly (or safely). Of course, situations where insurance companies try to deny coverage to such households and the like are a different story.




    ^^^^^^^YOU are so off base^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^


    Probably because you reside in La La Land.


    Joe Horn.
    Look him up on the internet.

    Here is an excerpt from one of his articles entitled :

    Risk Management Advice to Physicians and their Insurers:
    Don't Borrow Trouble

    By

    Joe Horn





    Physicians are licensed and certified in the practice of medicine, the treatment of illnesses and injuries, and in preventative activities. They may advise or answer questions about those issues. However, when physicians give advice about firearms safety in the home, without certification in that field, and without physically INSPECTING that particular home and those particular firearms, they are functioning outside the practice of medicine. Furthermore, if they fail to review the gamut of safety issues in the home, such as those relating to electricity, drains, disposals, compactors, garage doors, driveway safety, pool safety, pool fence codes and special locks for pool gates, auto safety, gas, broken glass, stored cleaning chemicals, buckets, toilets, sharp objects, garden tools, home tools, power tools, lawnmowers, lawn chemicals, scissors, needles, forks, knives, and on and on, well, you get the drift. A litigator could easily accuse that physician of being NEGLIGENT for not covering whichever one of those things that ultimately led to the death or injury of a child or any one in the family or even a visitor to the patient's home.


    AND:
    Consider a physician asking the following questions of his or her malpractice insurance carrier:

    One of my patients is suing me for NOT warning them that furniture polish was poisonous and their child drank it and died. I only warned them about firearms, drugs and alcohol. Am I covered for counseling patients about firearms safety while not mentioning and giving preventative advice about all the other dangers in the home, and doing so without formal training or certification in any aspect of home safety risk management? You know their answer.

    And now another word from me,
    Doctors And , specifically Pediatricians need to shut their pie-holes with all the intrusive bull crap.
    Stubborn likes this.
    If you want to make God laugh, tell him your plans.

    Washington didn't use his freedom of speech to defeat the British, He shot them!

    Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it whether it exists or not, diagnosing it incorrectly, and applying the wrong remedy." -- Ernest Benn

  6. #35
    VIP Member Array BugDude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Gulf Coast of Florida
    Posts
    9,355
    There is no law that says you have to answer the doc's question, nor answer it honestly. He may have the freedom of speech to ask, but you have the right to remain silent.
    Know Guns, Know Safety, Know Peace.
    No Guns, No Safety, No Peace.


    Guns are like sex and air...its no big deal until YOU can't get any.

  7. #36
    VIP Member
    Array oneshot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    +42.893612,-082.710236 , Mi.
    Posts
    8,015
    Thought I would post this information, to show that the Doctors need to worry about a lot more, before they concern themselves with firearms in the home.

    Selected Causes of Death, Ages 0-19, per 100,000 Population (2006)
    Cause Number of Deaths Mortality Rate
    Natural 35,708 43.6
    Perinatal Conditions 14,418 17.6
    Congenital Anomalies 6,906 8.4
    Neoplasms 2,291 2.8
    Respiratory Disease 1,450 1.8
    Circulatory Disease 1,610 2.0
    Nervous System Disease 1,546 1.9
    SIDS 2,323 2.8
    Unintentional Injury 11,674 14.2
    Motor Vehicle 7,006 8.5
    Drowning 1,077 1.3
    Fire/Burn 495 0.6
    Poisoning 839 1.0
    Suffocation/Strangulation 1,164 1.4
    Firearm 154 0.2
    Homicide 3,418 4.2
    Firearm 2,259 2.8
    Suicide 1,774 2.2
    Firearm 763 0.9
    Suffocation/Strangulation 798 1.0
    Poisoning 90 0.1

    Source: National Center for Health Statistics
    Rates based on 20 or fewer deaths may be unstable. Use with caution.


    Taken from here :National Child Mortality Data
    If you want to make God laugh, tell him your plans.

    Washington didn't use his freedom of speech to defeat the British, He shot them!

    Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it whether it exists or not, diagnosing it incorrectly, and applying the wrong remedy." -- Ernest Benn

  8. #37
    Senior Member Array SFury's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Wisconsin
    Posts
    757
    That's just it. Firearm related deaths for children are almost non-existent in the US. Many of the cases that you hear about are also gang related. Which has many different connotations as to the actual cause.

    Let's face it, there are firearms related deaths, and there are murders committed with firearms. Murders that are direct or indirect in nature.

    Just as all car accidents are not the same. Accidents caused by inattentive driving are not the same as accidents caused by drunk driving. People also have used cars to murder people with.

    Do the pediatricians that ask about gun ownership also ask if the parents, parent, other adults in the household drink or do drugs as well?

  9. #38
    Senior Member Array tbrenke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Phoenix, AZ
    Posts
    1,006
    Quote Originally Posted by ChrisMia View Post
    I don't buy that analogy. Out of the four things you mentioned, tell me which is the only one inherently dangerous by design . . .
    Statistically speaking, your car is inherently dangerous by design. 1/2 a ton that can travel at 70MPH. way more energy that any rifle.
    "I cannot undertake to lay my finger on that article of the Constitution, which granted a right to Congress of expending, on objects of benevolence, the money of their constituents." -1792, James Madison
    There are always too many Democratic, Republican and never enough U.S. congressmen.

  10. #39
    VIP Member Array chiefjason's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Hickory, NC
    Posts
    2,753
    It's still a free market. Find a Dr. who's only suggestion is to make sure you are wearing hearing protection when you shoot when he realizes you've lost a bit of hearing over the years. My Dr. rocks.
    I prefer to live dangerously free than safely caged!

    "Our houses are protected by the good Lord and a gun. And you might meet 'em both if you show up here not welcome son." Josh Thompson "Way Out Here"

  11. #40
    VIP Member Array Eagleks's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Kansas
    Posts
    7,701
    Quote Originally Posted by ChrisMia View Post
    There's nothing anti-gun about asking parents about potentially dangerous situations in the house that can be a threat to their kids. If anything, I'd expect it would facilitate a greater awareness of safe gun handling/storage in these households - sounds like a positive thing to me.
    From an "anti-doctor" , who is surely not an expert in guns ? You have to be joking.

    My house is my home, and how things are handled or stored in my house, won't be a matter of discussion with any physician. Period.

    They have enough issues of their own, like the Doctor strike in Florida in the 1970's where they would only do "life-saving" procedures. The death rate in Florida went DOWN while they were on strike, and went right back up after the strike was over. They need to worry about doctors being a danger to people's lives. I would have to look it up, but... there were amazing amounts of accidental deaths by mis-prescribed medications and "errors" in surgery in comparison to guns all together.
    I don't make jokes. I just watch the government and report the facts. --- Will Rogers ---
    Chief Justice John Roberts : "I don't see how you can read Heller and not take away from it the notion that the Second Amendment...was extremely important to the framers in their view of what liberty meant."

  12. #41
    Distinguished Member Array Stetson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Augusta,Maine
    Posts
    1,555
    I went to physical theraphy my pain specialist sent me to.First thing hit me in the face was no firearms allowed including ccw.I proceeded to tell the office manager her sign was not Maine's law
    and before here corporation starts qoating laws.I said you'd better check it's company policy not law.I had her so wound up she called corporate and spoke with the company hacks.She made sure she told me
    I was wrong.I told her call Maine Stateb Police. I said to her when I go back to the doctor we goingb to have a discussion as I refuse to support companies like yours with my hard earned dollars that doesn't
    endores important issues like second admendment.What pisswed me off the most this outfir was out of Texas.Anyways I went back to thee doctors and told him find someone else to treat me and I told him I
    have a problem spending my hard earned cash that doesn't support my political positin when it comes to 2and admendment. When I left that office for the last time with my 9mm glock in my coat pocket with a big
    smile on my face.

  13. #42
    Distinguished Member Array jumpwing's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Washington
    Posts
    1,271
    Quote Originally Posted by Hopyard View Post
    The answer I think is not in forbidding the collection of information, but in severely punishing the inappropriate dissemination of information and the misuse of information gathered for purposes other than that for which it was collected in the first place.
    ^ I liked what you wrote, but I have to disagree with this final statement for a couple of reasons:

    1. 'Severe punishment' is a great idea but it will never happen, not to the people who make the real money from peddling someone's personal data. Even if this punishment were in place, it wouldn't stop this sort of thing from happening, just as severe punishment doesn't stop criminals from committing rape, murder, torture, etc.

    2. Information collection is the ONLY place a breach can be prevented. As you pointed out, we live in the digital age; if your information is ANYwhere then you can be sure it's EVERYwhere.

    In order for a doctor to be effective, he'll need information about you; this has been true since doctoring was considered a profession. However, there is nothing about owning a gun that factors into any medical care I can think of. Being nosy about what sort of inanimate mechanical devices I have in the house is not 'doctoring'. It's not a doctor's job to sift through an inventory of your home and then offer relevant safety warnings, whether he records your answers or not. If doctors want to caution children or parents about the hazards of firearms, poisons, unfenced pools, fire-breathing dragons, or purple kryptonite then they can leave brochures in the waiting room. God knows we have PLENTY of time to read them.

    With all the new 'medicines' constantly coming on the market I would think ol' Doc would do well to keep abreast of their side-effects and potentially lethal cocktail combos and let me worry about whether I own a gun, watch scary movies, or drive too fast.
    Tzadik and Stubborn like this.
    "The flock sleep peaceably in their pasture at night because Sheepdogs stand ready to do violence on their behalf."
    cafepress.com/bgstudios

  14. #43
    Distinguished Member Array noway2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    North Carolina
    Posts
    1,865
    With all the new 'medicines' constantly coming on the market I would think ol' Doc would do well to keep abreast of their side-effects and potentially lethal cocktail combos and let me worry about whether I own a gun, watch scary movies, or drive too fast.
    They can't. Remember last year when when computer Watson won on the show Jeopardy. This is why the machine was created, to interact with the patients and actually be able to sift through and correlate the mass amount of data including symptoms, history, and side effects. Granted, were not there yet, but it is coming.

    Your point it is spot on, though, they are having too much trouble doing their job as it is to go poking their nose where it don't belong.

  15. #44
    VIP Member Array BugDude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Gulf Coast of Florida
    Posts
    9,355
    My Doctor asked me if I wanted to come over to his house and shoot groundhogs with him. Cool Doc.
    Know Guns, Know Safety, Know Peace.
    No Guns, No Safety, No Peace.


    Guns are like sex and air...its no big deal until YOU can't get any.

  16. #45
    VIP Member
    Array Hopyard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Disappeared
    Posts
    11,632
    Quote Originally Posted by jumpwing View Post
    ^ I liked what you wrote, but I have to disagree with this final statement for a couple of reasons:

    1. 'Severe punishment' is a great idea but it will never happen, not to the people who make the real money from peddling someone's personal data. Even if this punishment were in place, it wouldn't stop this sort of thing from happening, just as severe punishment doesn't stop criminals from committing rape, murder, torture, etc.

    2. Information collection is the ONLY place a breach can be prevented. As you pointed out, we live in the digital age; if your information is ANYwhere then you can be sure it's EVERYwhere.

    In order for a doctor to be effective, he'll need information about you; this has been true since doctoring was considered a profession. However, there is nothing about owning a gun that factors into any medical care I can think of. Being nosy about what sort of inanimate mechanical devices I have in the house is not 'doctoring'. It's not a doctor's job to sift through an inventory of your home and then offer relevant safety warnings, whether he records your answers or not. If doctors want to caution children or parents about the hazards of firearms, poisons, unfenced pools, fire-breathing dragons, or purple kryptonite then they can leave brochures in the waiting room. God knows we have PLENTY of time to read them.

    With all the new 'medicines' constantly coming on the market I would think ol' Doc would do well to keep abreast of their side-effects and potentially lethal cocktail combos and let me worry about whether I own a gun, watch scary movies, or drive too fast.
    You are correct that information collection is the only place a breach can be prevented. But, since information of all sorts has to be collected by all manner of businesses, we do need to punish those who misuse collected information. Perhaps we should start with making it illegal to put tracking cookies on a machine without permission and in locations which make it impossible to detect or remove. We could have laws against data mining and the use of bots for that purpose.

    In the example I gave, it would seem some one had to have gained access to contact lists. Probably security at all manner of on-line e-mail services and cell phone systems are way too easy to breach.

    We could also use some laws mandating data destruction.

    Nothing is ever secure. Even paper records. A few years back a doc went out of business and all his files were found in a dumpster.
    If the Union is once severed, the line of separation will grow wider and wider, and the controversies which are now debated and settled in the halls of legislation will then be tried in fields of battle and determined by the sword.
    Andrew Jackson

Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast

Links

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Search tags for this page

are there guns in your house? medicare

,

do you have a gun in your house doctor

,

do you have a gun in your house? doctor

,

do you have a gun in your house? doctor nurse fl

,

gun gag bill sc

,

gun questions required by health care providers?

,

health care people asking do you have a gun a gun in your house

,

health care providers asking patients if they have a gun in the house?

,

pointed a gun at a health care provider

,

questions about guns by healthcare providers

,

sc gag gun bill

,

the brady bill says doctors should have right to interrogate your child as to whether or not you have weapons and deny y

Click on a term to search for related topics.