Florida MD restrictions overturned.

[WoofersInc]

Looks like the law preventing doctors from asking about guns in the home has been overturned.

http://content.usatoday.com/communities/ondeadline/post/2011/09/us-judge-nullifies-fla-law-limiting-doctor-patient-gun-talk/1?csp=34news

A federal judge in Miami has blocked enforcement of Florida's landmark law restricting what doctors can tell patients about guns, ruling that it violates the First Amendment, the Associated Press reports.

 

[azmjs]

Good call. Paranoia can't trump the first amendment, even if the paranoia is in support of the second amendment.

 

[coondogger]

I'm not surprised. While I find the doctors' questions about gun ownership to be obnoxious intrusions into your non-medical personal life, they still have a constitutional right to ask. And you have a constitutional right to tell them, 'non of your business'.

 

[Mike1234567]

azmjs... The way I read it is doctors can now nose into your privacy regarding firearm ownership. I can't see how that's a good thing because, as physicians, they can cause all kinds of problems if they're anti in nature. They can claim there is a safety issue for the patient (you), your spouse, or your children... just because you have a gun in your house and "in their opinion" and "in your case" it's a problem.

 

[oneounceload]

Get real, the DOCTORS couldn't care less, however, the INSURANCE companies - who study all sorts of stats, DO care - THAT'S who the driver was

 

[gibson_es]

i think there is a fine line here.

let a doctor ask, he cant force you to answer, or to answer correctly.

however, it is obvious that our rights have limitations, mental patients for example. certain mental disabilities prevents one from purchasing or owning a firearm right?

i think there just needs to me some common sense used in this. i think its fine to be asked, as long as its fine to answer with whatever you want. this is of coarse for law abiding gun owners. if you have 17 mental dissordered and 13 previous suicide attempts and your dr (not "i have a cold" doctor. i meen phyciatrist[spelling]) askes, i think that should be looked at differently.

 

[azmjs]

Doctors don't work for the government and cannot compel you to either tell them the truth or answer their questions.

The answers to their questions are most likely privileged information protected by privacy laws.

They have no ability to "pry," and are already privy to your most absolutely private information, which is not whether you own a gun, but is instead your medical history and condition.

Paranoia is no excuse to deprive physicians of their first amendment rights.

 

[LibShooter]

The way I read it is doctors can now nose into your privacy regarding firearm ownership. I can't see how that's a good thing because, as physicians, they can cause all kinds of problems if they're anti in nature.

Here's another case of a law making the wrong thing illegal. Don't prohibit the doctors' asking questions. Prohibit their using the information to cause patients problems.

 

[pharmer]

My doc goes with me to most gunshows. I guess he knows I have a few. Never seen him write it in my chart, though. Joe

 

[Twiki357]

I have to disagree with the judges ruling. It is none of a doctors business unless it's a direct impact on a specific treatment. If memory serves me, the Florida law was passed because of an anti-gun procedure being put forth in medical schools for MD's to inquire, document, and discourage firearms possession. Also, and I don't know this for a fact, the electronic medical records required by obama care reportedly call for this information to be input, thereby creating a defacto database of gun owners.
I DO know that a recent health assessment questionnaire from my medical insurance carrier included a question about firearms in the house.

 

[thesecond]

"Florida MD restrictions overturned"

Actually, a temporary restraining order was issued, pending argument on the merits. The response to the complaint hasn't even been filed, and we've loads of folks 'spouting conclusory' about 1A law. Seriously?

Please do your research. There's ample Constitutional authority for the regulation of professional industries, particularly with respect to those interactions in which one has purported to act on behalf of another or to advise such other, in a professional capacity. Regulation may entail both the restriction of speech and the compulsion of speech.

This will go the distance.

(duplicate thread, btw.)

 

[SMMAssociates]

I had to see a shrink, courtesy of the Social Security folks, due to my disability claim, some years ago.

He asked me if I had guns. I told him that I did - not one of those things where you really should lie, although it was none of his business. Then he asked "how many". His eyes got a little big when I told him that I wasn't sure....

Then I reminded him that I was a semi-retired rent-a-cop (among all kinds of other things), and....

Guess he bought it - the Black Helicopters didn't land....

My doctor, btw, has been treating me (and the wife) for more than 30 years. Except for a hospital stay about 11 years ago, he's never seen me without a gun. EVERY time he finds the thing, he wants to know what it's for....

Regards,

 

[whalerman]

There are certainly many Docs that are reasonable about guns and the 2A. But lets not kid ourselves. The types that are apt to pry into our personal lives about guns are not balanced on the issue. And most people don't have a personal relationship with their Docs. They go in and do a yup/nope kinda thing, especially young people. Deny it if you wish but that's the way it is. It can be an intimidating setting. Many people, if questioned aggressively, will respond as they would to an authority figure. I wish the law would have remained in effect to keep these people out of this aspect of our lives. How many social workers have you met that have a balanced view of firearms? Some, but not many. Swallowing emotional anti gun bias is part of their degree plan. The Docs think of themselves as Social Workers who can write prescriptions.

 

[AirForceShooter]

Your Doc doesn't work for the government?
Of course he does.

Think about how much power your doc has over you.
He doesn't think your eyesight is good enough for you to drive, Bang your D/L is gone.
Heard of the Baker Act?
Your kid has too many bruises than he thinks he should, Hi this is the CPS officer.

AFS

 

[ATBackPackin]

The reason why I didn't mind the law was because the doctor could ask if it was relevant.

Story

"The FMA is satisfied that the current bill, with the compromise language, allows physicians to continue to look out for the safety and well-being of their patients," said FMA Executive Vice President Tim Stapleton. "The FMA is also pleased that the compromise language removed all civil and criminal penalties related to the patient-physician relationship."

If the FMA is fine with this, why aren't the Brady Pukes?

 

[ilbob]

Get real, the DOCTORS couldn't care less, however, the INSURANCE companies - who study all sorts of stats, DO care - THAT'S who the driver was

This is solely about politics in the AMA. There is a part of the AMA that ius very liberal and very anti-gun.

Personally, I think if doctors want to dispense forearms advice as part of their medical practice, I think they should be required by state law to become competent in that area first. Perhaps as evidenced by becoming a certified firearms instructor.

I think this is something that is almost certainly going to come back and bite all doctors in the backside.

 

[Ed N.]

Here's the problem: in Florida, it has been illegal for years now for anyone to compile a list or registry of firearms owners or firearms. Please see Florida statute 790.335 < http://www.leg.state.fl.us/Statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&Search_String=&URL=Ch0790/SEC335.HTM&Title=->2008->Ch0790->Section%20335#0790.335 >.

In part, the statute reads (emphasis added):
(2) PROHIBITIONS.--No state governmental agency or local government, special district, or other political subdivision or official, agent, or employee of such state or other governmental entity or any other person, public or private, shall knowingly and willfully keep or cause to be kept any list, record, or registry of privately owned firearms or any list, record, or registry of the owners of those firearms.

Under this statute, it is illegal for doctors to keep records of patients who own firearms. So if the courts decide the doctors can ask, it will still be illegal for doctors to record gun ownership in your medical records. Because of the confidentiality of medical records, though, it's nearly impossible to find out if a doctor is violating this law. The only way to ensure compliance is to keep them from gathering the information they are already prohibited from recording.

If you're worried about this, when your doctor asks you about gun ownership (mine never has) you might want to point out that he is legally prohibited from recording such ownership, independant of the "don't ask" law.

 

[JustinL]

because of an anti-gun procedure being put forth in medical schools for MD's to inquire, document, and discourage firearms possession. Also, and I don't know this for a fact, the electronic medical records required by obama care reportedly call for this information to be input, thereby creating a defacto database of gun owners.

Never heard of anything like this. I recall in Kaplan & Sadock's (a pysch text) the authors take a very anti-gun stance but have never heard of any class or lecture in undergraduate or graduate medical education instructing physicians to discourage gun ownership.

Neither have I heard anything about documenting firearm ownership as part of any EMR initiative.

And most people don't have a personal relationship with their Docs. They go in and do a yup/nope kinda thing, especially young people. Deny it if you wish but that's the way it is.

It is supposed to be an intimate relationship but we are not supposed to be your friend. Declining reimbursement means you have to see more people per day just to stay afloat than you would in the past.

The Docs think of themselves as Social Workers who can write prescriptions

If any of us wanted to be social workers we'd have gone to a different school.

 

[cbrgator]

Ignoring for a moment the potential 1A issues...

There may be some pro-gun or at least apathetic doctors, but IIRC, isn't it the official position of the AMA to discourage gun ownership? I could be wrong.

 

[ATBackPackin]

Ignoring for a moment the potential 1A issues...

There may be some pro-gun or at least apathetic doctors, but IIRC, isn't it the official position of the AMA to discourage gun ownership? I could be wrong.

It definitely is of the AAP and would imagine it is as well with the AMA. Now that doesn't mean there aren't doctors who are gun owners or believers of the 2nd Amendment, but I would imagine they are not the majority.

AAP policy says the only way to prevent unintended injuries to children due to guns is to keep guns out of homes and communities.

Just for the record I don't have a problem with a doctor asking me if I own guns. I have a problem if said doctor is being told to ask me if I have guns and then recording such information in my medical record.

 

[Loosedhorse]

Ignoring for a moment the potential 1A issues...

Hard to do with a 1A case.

isn't it the official position of the AMA to discourage gun ownership?

If so, so what? Isn't that the (1A) right of the AMA?

Some AMA policies:

Handgun Control: AMA-MSS will ask the AMA to endorse strict federal regulation of the manufacture, sale, importation, distribution, and licensing of handguns and their component parts.

Prevention of Unintentional Firearm Accidents in Children: AMA-MSS will ask the AMA to increase efforts to reduce pediatric firearm morbidity and mortality by encouraging its members: (1) to inquire as to the presence of household firearms as a part of childproofing the home; (2) to educate patients to the dangers of firearms to children; (3) to encourage patients to educate their children and neighbors as to the dangers of firearms; and (4) to routinely remind patients to obtain firearm safety locks and store firearms under lock and key; and that the AMA encourage state medical societies to work with other organizations to increase public education about firearm safety.

Support for a Seven Day Waiting Period for the Purchase of Handguns: AMA-MSS supports the legislation of a 7-day waiting period and police check before a handgun can be purchased.

Taxation of Handgun Sales: AMA-MSS will ask the AMA to support a federal tax of all handgun and handgun ammunition sales to be used to help cover medical bills for the victims of handgun violence and to fund public education on the prevention of violence

Regulation of Handgun Safety and Quality: AMA-MSS will ask the AMA to support legislation that seeks to apply the same quality and safety standards to domestically manufactured handguns that are currently applied to imported handguns.

Sounds pretty 1A-protected to me.

 

[ATBackPackin]

And a seven day waiting period does what to protect or educate children in the home?

 

[LibShooter]

...because of an anti-gun procedure being put forth in medical schools for MD's to inquire, document, and discourage firearms possession.

I guess a lot has changed in the last five years. When my niece was in medical school she didn't learn to be anti-gun. A residency in an inner city trauma center taught her a lot about gun shot wounds. She came out of that fairly anti-gun.

As to the AMA and the AAP... they are private organizations and get to take any stance they want on guns. Like the NRA.

 

[Loosedhorse]

And a seven day waiting period does what to protect or educate children in the home?

Immaterial. The question is "Why would an organization supporting a seven-day waiting period not qualify for 1A protection?"

1A does not protect only the "good" ideas.

 

[Art Eatman]

I like Tamara's answer: "Sure! What kind do you want?"

I see the deal as a First Amendment issue, no different than the Nazis in Skokie, Illinois.

My own answer to any snoopie-nose, doctor or no, would be, "None of your business." I might lecture about questions one should never ask anybody. Like, how much money do you have? How many acres do you own? What did you pay for your car? How many head of livestock do you run? And, of course, how many guns do you own?