When a doctor sees a health or safety issue they have a moral obligation to speak up. I am confused why the State of Fl would choose to limit a doctors ability to speak to their patients. I agree with the article that no doctor should speak with political motives.
“The intent is to protect the privacy of firearms owners and to stop the political interrogation of gun owners and the children of gun owners when they seek medical care,” Hammer said in an email.”
However, this bill goes too far. Instead of seeking to stop interrogations, they are stopping all conversation. No doubt the courts in FL have actual important cases they are working on. Its a shame that this law was passed, and now upheld by the courts. What a waste of time.
a dr. asking about firearms makes less sense than asking about hobbies, sports activities, vehicle type/useage, job hazards. a person would start to object to a list of questions as long as would be required if firearms ownership was compared to every other relevant (or irrelevant) factor of their lifestyle.
Whether or not I own a gun has nothing to do with why I choose to see a doctor. Neither does the question of whether or not I own a car. There should be neither an obligation nor prohibition to ask about such things.
I agree it is not related, but I think the doctor has the right to ask and the patient has the right to refuse to answer. Since when do we legislate what people can say to one another? This was a collosal waste of time and money and only goes to show that Floridians have their priorities all screwed up.
Reading between the lines of this article, what do you bet this was a pediatrician who learned from a child that there was unsafe access to the gun…who proceeded to question the parents about it?
If so, then this questioning is just as reasonable as a pediatrician looking a child over for bruises and other signs of abuse or neglect. Or asking if the child what vegetable they like & eat.
I guess then it would be worthwhile to ask the children, if mommy and daddy drink alcohol or use drugs. Or do mommy and daddy ever yell at each other or fight. Yes, I’m sure there are many questions we could ask children about their parents to improve their safety.
What’s next? My political views? Why would the doctor tell me his views on gun ownership or inquire about it? And then make a care decision based upon my response? THAT is unconstitutional. It is not a matter of freedom of speech, it is a matter of PRIVACY. Does it go in my HIPAA-protected file? Is this really something they debated and legislated?
Bottom line: If the reason I’m seeing a doctor isn’t gun-related, the doctor should not say the word “gun” during my visit.
Wrong on all points. The doctor can tell you his views on the latest episode of Twilight if he so chooses. The point is it’s his free speech right and it’s unconstitutional to prevent him.
Same goes for a pediatrician who may want to impress upon his patients the need to adequately secure weapons as 17 children were shot and killed with a family firearm in Florida last year alone. Their health and safety is his job.
Bottom line, if you are so afraid of even hearing the word “gun” you should tell your doctor. It can’t be healthy.
On the contrary, I believe in the second amendment right, though I do not own a gun. And a family member sustained a gunshot wound by a criminal. That said, our family doctor doesn’t even mention the surgeries that followed the injury. They are irrelevant at this time. He may talk about the weather, sure. Inquire about sleeping patterns, diet, exercise, alcohol consumption, etc. And if we did own a gun, I would get safety instruction from the NRA, not the doctor. Does he make sure we renew our automobile insurance? After all, the chance of being struck by a vehicle far outnumbers being struck by a bullet. Freedom of speech doesn’t give a doctor a right to inquire into aspects of my life not directly related to my care. If I’m having a physical, where is the smoking gun? If it’s a thyroid condition, where is the smoking gun? My HEALTH is my doctor’s concern. SAFETY is mine, unless I give him reason to believe I’m not doing a good job of it based on my HEALTH condition.
Freedom of speech absolutely gives the doctor the right to ask. As it also gives you the right to tell him it’s none of his business.
“Almost 20,000 people committed suicide in the United States with firearms in 2011. More than 11,000 were killed by firearms that year, and more than 200 were killed in accidents with guns. In 2009, almost 7,400 children were hospitalized because of injuries related to guns.
Doctors who ask about guns aren’t doing so because they’re nosy. They’re doing so because the vast majority of those deaths and injuries are preventable.”
The law gives the doctor the right to ask as long as it’s medicall necessary.
So if there was a history of depression/attempted suicide, etc–then he would be within his legal rights to ask.
However, using gun ownership as a means of denying service to a patient is ridiculous.
August 5, 2014 at 4:50 pm
Libby says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
I don’t believe he denied service because the guy owned a gun. He denied service because the guy wasn’t willing to tell him whether or not he owned a gun. I guess the doctor felt there was a lack of trust in their relationship and thought it best if he go to another physician.
Since there is doctor/patient confidentiality, no-one would know what your doctor talked to you about unless you told them. And then it’s your word against their.
I just think it’s ridiculous to legislate what people can and can not speak about with one another.
July 30, 2014 at 8:27 am
KY jw says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
I can see a need to discuss if the patient is a child, just to be certain that any guns are stored safely.
I also think if the patient is depressed or anxious, it might be a good idea to find out if they have access to a gun.
Otherwise, no it’s not necessary for the treatment. I honestly can’t think of a single time my doctor has quizzed me about guns. That includes me being there when my child is the patient. I am curious about what started this thing.
Talk about republicans like Scott and their free market, limited government mantra, this seems to fly right into the face of that. The state makes a law prohibiting insurance companies for charging more if there is a gun at home. Doesn’t sound like free market to me, seems like the heavy hand of regulation. And telling doctors what they can talk about in a doctor patient relationship, talk about heavy handed government regulation. Today’s republicans like Scott are a far cry from true, limited government republicans of yore
Being a politician today is all about how many followers you have on twitter and what type of lobbying job you can get after you cheat on your wife that you married because it looks good on the resume.
I find it amazing how often righties talk about freedom and liberty until it adversely affects them and/or their beliefs.
Let the doctor ask about guns if he/she feels it is appropriate. If the patient does not like it, do not answer and find another doctor. If the doctor does not like the fact that the patient does not answer, stop seeing that patient. It is call free-will.
If the doctor was required by the government to ask about guns, I would have a problem with that.
Doctors have license. License means regulated service. Doctors are not comedians to talk about averything freedom of speech let them in time of barbeque with friends. License permits doctors to speak with patients only if it medical necessity or get ready to lose license.
How is “medically necessary” to be defined and by whom?
As long as they keep the information they obtain confidential and only use it to counsel the patient, what difference does it make?
As I stated previously, if the government begins to require doctors to ask about guns and/or requires doctors to disclose this information to the government, then I would have a problem.
When a doctor sees a health or safety issue they have a moral obligation to speak up. I am confused why the State of Fl would choose to limit a doctors ability to speak to their patients. I agree with the article that no doctor should speak with political motives.
“The intent is to protect the privacy of firearms owners and to stop the political interrogation of gun owners and the children of gun owners when they seek medical care,” Hammer said in an email.”
However, this bill goes too far. Instead of seeking to stop interrogations, they are stopping all conversation. No doubt the courts in FL have actual important cases they are working on. Its a shame that this law was passed, and now upheld by the courts. What a waste of time.
Do you, Producer #1, have any business knowing if I am a gun owner? Well, neither does my doctor.
a dr. asking about firearms makes less sense than asking about hobbies, sports activities, vehicle type/useage, job hazards. a person would start to object to a list of questions as long as would be required if firearms ownership was compared to every other relevant (or irrelevant) factor of their lifestyle.
I’m with Bob on this.
Being grilled by a doc over gun ownership is ridiculous. There are so many other, more important conversations to have:
Hobbies, and their relative safety/danger level
Eating habits
Excercise habits
Unhealthy addictions
The list goes on. Owning a gun? Shouldn’t be on the list at all.
Unless you’re a quack doc with a history of malpractice and are worried about someone shooting you in revenge, I guess.
Then having that conversation might seem important.
Guess if the injury is gun related………….
Whether or not I own a gun has nothing to do with why I choose to see a doctor. Neither does the question of whether or not I own a car. There should be neither an obligation nor prohibition to ask about such things.
I agree it is not related, but I think the doctor has the right to ask and the patient has the right to refuse to answer. Since when do we legislate what people can say to one another? This was a collosal waste of time and money and only goes to show that Floridians have their priorities all screwed up.
Reading between the lines of this article, what do you bet this was a pediatrician who learned from a child that there was unsafe access to the gun…who proceeded to question the parents about it?
If so, then this questioning is just as reasonable as a pediatrician looking a child over for bruises and other signs of abuse or neglect. Or asking if the child what vegetable they like & eat.
I guess then it would be worthwhile to ask the children, if mommy and daddy drink alcohol or use drugs. Or do mommy and daddy ever yell at each other or fight. Yes, I’m sure there are many questions we could ask children about their parents to improve their safety.
What’s next? My political views? Why would the doctor tell me his views on gun ownership or inquire about it? And then make a care decision based upon my response? THAT is unconstitutional. It is not a matter of freedom of speech, it is a matter of PRIVACY. Does it go in my HIPAA-protected file? Is this really something they debated and legislated?
Bottom line: If the reason I’m seeing a doctor isn’t gun-related, the doctor should not say the word “gun” during my visit.
Wrong on all points. The doctor can tell you his views on the latest episode of Twilight if he so chooses. The point is it’s his free speech right and it’s unconstitutional to prevent him.
Same goes for a pediatrician who may want to impress upon his patients the need to adequately secure weapons as 17 children were shot and killed with a family firearm in Florida last year alone. Their health and safety is his job.
Bottom line, if you are so afraid of even hearing the word “gun” you should tell your doctor. It can’t be healthy.
On the contrary, I believe in the second amendment right, though I do not own a gun. And a family member sustained a gunshot wound by a criminal. That said, our family doctor doesn’t even mention the surgeries that followed the injury. They are irrelevant at this time. He may talk about the weather, sure. Inquire about sleeping patterns, diet, exercise, alcohol consumption, etc. And if we did own a gun, I would get safety instruction from the NRA, not the doctor. Does he make sure we renew our automobile insurance? After all, the chance of being struck by a vehicle far outnumbers being struck by a bullet. Freedom of speech doesn’t give a doctor a right to inquire into aspects of my life not directly related to my care. If I’m having a physical, where is the smoking gun? If it’s a thyroid condition, where is the smoking gun? My HEALTH is my doctor’s concern. SAFETY is mine, unless I give him reason to believe I’m not doing a good job of it based on my HEALTH condition.
Freedom of speech absolutely gives the doctor the right to ask. As it also gives you the right to tell him it’s none of his business.
“Almost 20,000 people committed suicide in the United States with firearms in 2011. More than 11,000 were killed by firearms that year, and more than 200 were killed in accidents with guns. In 2009, almost 7,400 children were hospitalized because of injuries related to guns.
Doctors who ask about guns aren’t doing so because they’re nosy. They’re doing so because the vast majority of those deaths and injuries are preventable.”
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/07/30/upshot/do-you-own-a-gun-in-florida-doctors-cant-ask-you-that.html?_r=0
Libby,
The law gives the doctor the right to ask as long as it’s medicall necessary.
So if there was a history of depression/attempted suicide, etc–then he would be within his legal rights to ask.
However, using gun ownership as a means of denying service to a patient is ridiculous.
I don’t believe he denied service because the guy owned a gun. He denied service because the guy wasn’t willing to tell him whether or not he owned a gun. I guess the doctor felt there was a lack of trust in their relationship and thought it best if he go to another physician.
Since there is doctor/patient confidentiality, no-one would know what your doctor talked to you about unless you told them. And then it’s your word against their.
I just think it’s ridiculous to legislate what people can and can not speak about with one another.
I can see a need to discuss if the patient is a child, just to be certain that any guns are stored safely.
I also think if the patient is depressed or anxious, it might be a good idea to find out if they have access to a gun.
Otherwise, no it’s not necessary for the treatment. I honestly can’t think of a single time my doctor has quizzed me about guns. That includes me being there when my child is the patient. I am curious about what started this thing.
Talk about republicans like Scott and their free market, limited government mantra, this seems to fly right into the face of that. The state makes a law prohibiting insurance companies for charging more if there is a gun at home. Doesn’t sound like free market to me, seems like the heavy hand of regulation. And telling doctors what they can talk about in a doctor patient relationship, talk about heavy handed government regulation. Today’s republicans like Scott are a far cry from true, limited government republicans of yore
Being a politician today is all about how many followers you have on twitter and what type of lobbying job you can get after you cheat on your wife that you married because it looks good on the resume.
I find it amazing how often righties talk about freedom and liberty until it adversely affects them and/or their beliefs.
Let the doctor ask about guns if he/she feels it is appropriate. If the patient does not like it, do not answer and find another doctor. If the doctor does not like the fact that the patient does not answer, stop seeing that patient. It is call free-will.
If the doctor was required by the government to ask about guns, I would have a problem with that.
Ask all you want, but…….
Doctors have license. License means regulated service. Doctors are not comedians to talk about averything freedom of speech let them in time of barbeque with friends. License permits doctors to speak with patients only if it medical necessity or get ready to lose license.
Andy,
How is “medically necessary” to be defined and by whom?
As long as they keep the information they obtain confidential and only use it to counsel the patient, what difference does it make?
As I stated previously, if the government begins to require doctors to ask about guns and/or requires doctors to disclose this information to the government, then I would have a problem.