Doc, what’s up with snooping? (Merged)
This is a discussion on Doc, what’s up with snooping? (Merged) within the The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion forums, part of the Related Topics category; I think I would take very strong exception to a doctor asking those kinds of questions to my child.
He probably wouldn't get far before ...
October 9th, 2007 11:44 AM
I think I would take very strong exception to a doctor asking those kinds of questions to my child.
He probably wouldn't get far before I told him if he wanted to know any of that he could ask me. And then I'd tell him it's none of his business.
I am all for the safety of our children, but protecting my children is MY responsibility, not the state's the doctor's office, or anyone else.
October 9th, 2007 12:15 PM
October 9th, 2007 01:17 PM
That's simple enough...you just have your lawyer attack their professional opinion. They're a doctor, not a firearms expert, nor security expert, nor law enforcement expert and therefore cannot have a valid, reasonable opinion on the matter in a court of law. Challenge on that.
Originally Posted by Rob72
October 9th, 2007 01:47 PM
I've heard of stuff like this happening, under the guise of "child safety." Just one more reason to never leave your kid unattended on a visit to the Dr.'s.
"A well-educated electorate, being necessary to the continuance of a free state, the right of the people to keep and read books shall not be infringed."
Is this hard to understand? Then why does it get unintelligible to some people when 5 little words are changed?
October 9th, 2007 01:53 PM
+1 to your son
Originally Posted by Miggy
October 9th, 2007 06:06 PM
This will be the norm with HillaryCare..........
A vote is like a rifle, its usefulness is based on the character of the user -T Roosevelt
If you carry a gun, some will call you paranoid. If I carry, what do I have to be paranoid about? -C Smith
An unarmed man can only flee from evil, and evil is not overcome by fleeing from it. -J Cooper
October 9th, 2007 08:31 PM
Do you know something I don't know??
Originally Posted by f8lranger4x4
I know I was a wild & carefree young man romantic wise but...
You have to make the shot when fire is smoking, people are screaming, dogs are barking, kids are crying and sirens are coming.
Ego will kill you. Leave it at home.
October 9th, 2007 10:50 PM
Not to mention they are not even Safety Professionals either.
Originally Posted by packinnova
October 10th, 2007 02:04 AM
Jim, on the schooling issue. It is a common misconception that MDs have a college education, but that is not necessarily so. People who want to be MDs go to college in Pre-Med, but do not necessarily get a degree before being accepted into medical school. They finish the requirements for acceptance into medical school and if they get accepted they do not finish a bachelor's degree. Many medical schools attached to universities award bachelor's degrees to medical students who complete their first year of medical school.
Originally Posted by firefighter4884
Sorry folks, but you may be being treated by an MD that does not have a college education.
Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the universe. Albert Einstein
October 10th, 2007 06:02 AM
Originally Posted by Captain Crunch
"(3) Support the right of local jurisdictions to enact firearm regulations that are stricter than those that exist in state statutes and encourage state and local medical societies to evaluate and support local efforts to enact useful controls. (BOT Rep. 50, I-93; Reaffirmed: CSA Rep. 8, A-05)"
Okay, so I guess the AMA doesn't mind a patchwork hodgepodge of laws that people can be obeying in one town and then breaking in another, as they drive to a mall. I wonder how doctors in the AMA would like it if they could be licensed to practice in Suffolk County, NY, and because Nassau County had stricter licensing requirements for doctors, they could be criminals for practicing medicine there.
"The AMA encourages states to adopt legislation enabling schools to limit and control the possession and storage of weapons or potential weapons on school property. (Sub. Res. 402, I-95; Reaffirmed: CSA Rep. 8, A-05)"
A pencil is a "potential weapon," geniuses. I guess they should be banned from schools?
It's been said many times that when it was perfectly legal and ok for kids to bring their .22s to school, keep them in a locker and then go shooting after school, there were no school shootings going on.
"(2) Support legislation outlawing the Black Talon and other similarly constructed bullets."
Yes, because god knows, we need to make sure that bullets are not lethal! Heaven forbid that they should be!
"Our AMA supports appropriate legislation that would restrict the sale and private ownership of inexpensive handguns commonly referred to as "Saturday night specials," and large clip, high-rate-of-fire automatic and semi-automatic firearms, or any weapon that is modified or redesigned to operate as a large clip, high-rate-of-fire automatic or semi-automatic weapon. (Sub. Res. 264, A-89; Reaffirmed: BOT Rep. 50, I-93; Amended: Res.215, I-94; Reaffirmed: CSA Rep. 6, A-04; Reaffirmation A-07)"
Thus demonstrating ignorance of the laws as they are currently (regarding full auto legality), the design and function of modern firearms, and even simple firearm terminology.
"The AMA supports a ban on the manufacture, importation, and sale of any firearm which cannot be detected by ordinary airport screening devices. (Sub. Res. 79, A-88; Reaffirmed: Sunset Report, I-98)"
Even though such firearms have never existed, do not exist, and likely will not exist.
"Our AMA supports stricter enforcement of present federal and state gun control legislation and the imposition of mandated penalties by the judiciary for crimes committed with the use of a firearm, including the illegal possession of a firearm. (Sub. Res. 31, I-81; Reaffirmed: CLRPD Rep. F, I-91; Amended: BOT Rep. I-93-50; Reaffirmed: Res. 409, A-00; Reaffirmation A-07)"
Ah! I suppose there had to be at least one sensible policy statement in that pile of garbage!
But good god! the rest of that site reads like a leftist's dream of governmental control over every damned aspect of people's lives! There doesn't seem to be one area of life that they don't want to control and regulate... you know, for your own good.
October 10th, 2007 11:41 AM
Lots of emotion, and not much knowledge or thinking, here guys.
Originally Posted by packinnova
1) It is "common knowledge" that improperly stored firearms result in accidental deaths. Ergo, for child-safety, more commonly referred to as the "community wellness profile", the doc may ask about the presence of firearms (and smoke detectors, and does mommy get drunk on weekends, etc..). Now, the parent may refuse or not answer, but in a medical interview, there is no requirement that a parent be present, barring a custody ruling, court-ordered intervention or similar.
You could challenge the doc's opinion...but the doc never stated one. How much money does any individual have to flush on this issue? Better off writing your Congressmen, and choosing a doc who's pro-RKBA.
2) State laws vary, but generally they state that suspicion of maltreatment/imminent danger to the welfare of a child be reported immediately. In the context of spiral fractures in a 2 yo's arm, that's a good thing. In the context of an activist doctor- its a shield, allowing entry into your home. Your doctor's education is irrelevant, in this instance.
I do not agree with these policies, but to suggest that you have any real legal recourse on this issue, at this time is foolish (unless you have significant wealth and time). Don't kid yourselves or anyone else. Our best protection is to petition the lawmakers, vote with our dollars, and keep our mouths shut and teach our families to do the same. DHS (and the AMA) can make your life worse hell than a joint ATF/IRS investigation. Trust me on this...
Yeah, PJ, the AMA would march happily along with Stalin or Hitler.
October 10th, 2007 03:25 PM
Our AMA recognizes that uncontrolled ownership and use of firearms, especially handguns, is a serious threat to the public's health inasmuch as the weapons are one of the main causes of intentional and unintentional injuries and deaths.
Along with the other posts pertaining to a singular focus on one "hazard", how bout they push for baninating farm equipment. Seems to me that farming is one of the most dangerous professions, yet combines run amok in this country.
NRA, USPSA SS & Lim-10
Blessed are they who, faced with danger, think only of the front sight. J. Cooper
October 10th, 2007 04:22 PM
I can argue the first line in #1 'till I'm blue in the face, but I suspect that's for another thread. That "Common Knowledge" statement uses the same lopsided logic that the anti-folks use to infer that a gun placed on a table is going to get up and shoot someone "accidentally" by itself. If I leave my car keys on the kitchen counter they don't just walk themselves out to the car, start it up, and plow down the nearest neighbor.
Originally Posted by Rob72
As for #2, on the contrary, their education is directly relevant in a spiral fracture case, but like I said the first time around, basically if someone with deep enough pockets can attack any gun questioning they have, they should win. If they were an LEO with 10+yrs behind them it'd be a whole different ball game, but it's not. Their field of study is medical.
October 11th, 2007 10:12 AM
Doctor's Asking Gun Questions
Here's the link to the story and the story as well.
Guns Don't Kill Kids, Irresponsible Adults With Guns Do
Wednesday, October 10, 2007
By John Lott, Jr.
Should your doctor ask your child if you own a gun?
Guidelines issued by the American Academy of Pediatric say "yes."
They warn that "Children are curious even if they’ve had some sort of firearm training. That’s why parents taking responsibility for safe gun storage is so essential.”
Doctors across the United States are being advised to interrogate children about mom and dad’s "bad" behavior.
It sounds simple enough, but the problem is that the advice ignores the benefits and exaggerates the costs of gun ownership.
Take a recent example from Massachusetts that was discussed in the Boston Herald:
"Debbie is a mom from Uxbridge who was in the examination room when the pediatrician asked her 5-year-old, 'Does Daddy own a gun?'
"When the little girl said yes, the doctor began grilling her and her mom about the number and type of guns, how they are stored, etc.
"If the incident had ended there, it would have merely been annoying.
"But when a friend in law enforcement let Debbie know that her doctor had filed a report with the police about her family’s (entirely legal) gun ownership, she got mad."
Perhaps it was only a matter of time. Accidental gun deaths involving children get national coverage. News programs stage experiments with 5 and 6-year-olds in a room filled with toys and a gun. Shocking pictures show the children picking up the gun and playing with it like a toy. For years, the Clinton administration would show public service ads with the voices or pictures of young children between the ages of 3 and 7 implying an epidemic of accidental gun deaths involving children.
With all this attention, the fear is understandable, but it is still irresponsible. Convincing patients not to own guns or to at least lock them up will cost more lives than it will save. It also gives a misleading impression of what poses the greatest dangers to children.
Accidental gun deaths among children are fortunately much rarer than most people believe. Consider the following numbers.
In 2003, for the United States, the Centers for Disease Control reports that 28 children under age 10 died from accidental shots. With some 90 million gun owners and about 40 million children under 10, it is hard to find any item as commonly owned in American homes, as potentially as lethal, that has as low of an accidental death rate.
These deaths also have little to do with "naturally curious" children shooting other children. From 1995 to 2001 only about nine of these accidental gun deaths each year involve a child under 10 shooting another child or themselves. Overwhelmingly, the shooters are adult males with long histories of alcoholism, arrests for violent crimes, automobile crashes, and suspended or revoked driver's licenses.
Even if gun locks can stop the few children who abuse a gun from doing so, gun locks cannot stop adults from firing their own gun. It makes a lot more sense for doctors to ask if "daddy" has a violent criminal record or a history of substance abuse, rather than ask if they own a gun.
Fear about guns also seems greatest among those who know the least about them.
For example, those unfamiliar with guns don’t realize that most young children simply couldn’t fire your typical semi-automatic pistol. Even the few who posses the strength to pull back the slide on the gun are unlikely to know that they must do that to put the bullet in the chamber or that they need to switch off the safety.
With so many greater dangers facing children everyday from common household items, it is not obvious why guns have been singled out. Here are some of the other ways that children under 10 died in 2004.
Over 1,400 children were killed by cars, almost 260 of those deaths were young pedestrians. Bicycle and space heater accidents take many times more children’s lives than guns. Over 90 drowned in bathtubs. The most recent yearly data available indicates that over 30 children under age 5 drowned in five-gallon plastic water buckets.
Yet, the real problem with this gun phobia is that without guns, victims are much more vulnerable to criminal attack. Guns are used defensively some 2 million times each year. Even though the police are extremely important in reducing crime, they simply can't be there all the time and virtually always arrive after the crime has been committed. Having a gun is by far the safest course of action when one is confronted by a criminal.
The cases where young children use guns to save their family’s lives rarely makes the news. Recent examples where children’s lives were clearly lost because guns were locked and inaccessible are ignored.
Recent research that I did examining juvenile accidental gun deaths for all U.S. states from 1977 to 1998, found that sixteen states mandating that guns be locked up had no impact. What did happen, however, was that criminals were emboldened to attack people in their homes and crimes were more successful; 300 more murders and 4,000 more rapes occurred each year in these states. Burglaries also rose dramatically. The evidence also indicates that states with the biggest increases in gun ownership have had the biggest drops in violent crime.
Asking patients about guns not only strains doctor patient relationships, it exaggerates the dangers and risks lives. Yet, in the end, possibly some good can come out of all this gun phobia. If your doctors ask you whether you own a gun, rather than sarcastically asking them if they own a space heater, why not offer to go out to a shooting range together and teach them about guns?
John Lott, Jr., is the author of Freedomnomics and a Senior Research Scholar at the University of Maryland.
October 11th, 2007 10:36 AM
I had seen an article simular to this a few years back about Doctors talking with patients about gun safety. What it came down to was that if a Doctor was going to speak to a patient about gun safety they also had to speak about total home safety or they could be held liable if the patient was injured by something the Doctor had not given them a safety talk on.
By jfl in forum Law Enforcement, Military & Homeland Security Discussion
Last Post: March 21st, 2009, 02:16 AM
By bigjake in forum Concealed Carry Issues & Discussions
Last Post: February 12th, 2009, 08:10 PM
By DrLewall in forum The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion
Last Post: January 27th, 2008, 04:07 AM
Search tags for this page
accidental gun deaths of children
doc, what?s up with snooping?
Click on a term to search for related topics.