Doctors and gun question

[abajaj11]

Under obamacare, which increasingly looks like it will NOT be repealed under Obama Or Romney, guns will be considered a health hazard, not unlike tobacco.
Studies will be published by leftists that will "prove" that guns are unsafe and a "health premium" will be charged for them. Much like cigarettes cost a boatload more han they did a few years ago, expect the price of guns to go way way up with the health care tax that will be imposed on them.
Same with ammo and reloading.
All for the children.....

 

[David2012]

With our current U.S. Attorney General Holder, we need to be very concerned about any possible data base about our gun ownership.... as he has radical views. Did you see the 1995 anti-gun video of him telling a women's national Democrtatic club that people needed to be brainwashed into thinking differently about guns?

"Breitbart.com posted a C-SPAN2 video from 1995 of then-U.S. Attorney Eric Holder discussing a public campaign to ”really brainwash people into thinking about guns in a vastly different way.”

In his remarks, to the Woman’s National Democratic Club, he explained he wanted to mimic anti-smoking campaigns to “change the hearts and minds of people in Washington, DC” about guns.

(:26)“What we need to do is change the way in which people think about guns, especially young people, and make it something that’s not cool, that it’s not acceptable, it’s not hip to carry a gun anymore, in the way in which we changed our attitudes about cigarettes.”

Mr. Holder then goes on to say that schools must must engage in daily anti-gun messaging "at every level," saying:

(2:46)"I've also asked the school board to make a part of everyday some kind of anti-violence, anti-gun message. Everyday, every school at every level. One thing that I think is clear with young people and with adults as well is that we just have to be repetitive about this. It's not enough to simply have a catchy ad on a Monday and only do it on a Monday. We need to do this everyday of the week and just really brainwash people into thinking about guns in a vastly different way."

http://www.washingtontimes.com/blog...-holder-95-anti-gun-brainwash-remarks-likely/

 

[tRidiot]

Ok, I can see that. If I can put aside my worries about the government health database, it appears better to answer, "no comment." But the larger question is, "Why is it legitimate for doctors to be asking about firearms ownership in the first place?" Shouldn't doctors refuse to participate in collecting such information?

If you want to look at it like that, fine. However, when you take a stand like that and one of your patients dies, you can bet that the authorities will ask why you didn't screen your patients for such things. When you stand to lose everything you've worked for for years, maybe decades, over such a simple thing, then maybe you'll understand.

It's really easier for you as a patient to just say, "None of your business," than for your doctor to take the risk of a lawsuit in the future with every single patient by omitting what are considered these days to be "standard" screening questions.

If you don't like it, you're always welcome to see another doctor. But those will be harder and harder to find as time goes on, and simply labeling your doctor as part of the evil of society for asking questions to protect his patients, his liability, his family and everything he owns, either professionally or personally, is painting with a pretty damn broad brush. If you're that militant about it, it's probably better you don't come see me, I could use patients who believe in a 2-way street that protects us both, rather than patients who believe I'm out to get them and don't give a damn about me, either.

Just remember, militantism will only serve to alienate you.

 

[abajaj11]

If you want to look at it like that, fine. However, when you take a stand like that and one of your patients dies, you can bet that the authorities will ask why you didn't screen your patients for such things. When you stand to lose everything you've worked for for years, maybe decades, over such a simple thing, then maybe you'll understand.

It's really easier for you as a patient to just say, "None of your business," than for your doctor to take the risk of a lawsuit in the future with every single patient by omitting what are considered these days to be "standard" screening questions.

If you don't like it, you're always welcome to see another doctor. But those will be harder and harder to find as time goes on, and simply labeling your doctor as part of the evil of society for asking questions to protect his patients, his liability, his family and everything he owns, either professionally or personally, is painting with a pretty damn broad brush. If you're that militant about it, it's probably better you don't come see me, I could use patients who believe in a 2-way street that protects us both, rather than patients who believe I'm out to get them and don't give a damn about me, either.

Just remember, militantism will only serve to alienate you.

Maybe i'm missing something here but is there a proven link between firearms possession and state of health? just trying to understand why you wold consider firearms ownership a "standard screening question".

 

[Glocktogo]

If you want to look at it like that, fine. However, when you take a stand like that and one of your patients dies, you can bet that the authorities will ask why you didn't screen your patients for such things. When you stand to lose everything you've worked for for years, maybe decades, over such a simple thing, then maybe you'll understand.

It's really easier for you as a patient to just say, "None of your business," than for your doctor to take the risk of a lawsuit in the future with every single patient by omitting what are considered these days to be "standard" screening questions.

If you don't like it, you're always welcome to see another doctor. But those will be harder and harder to find as time goes on, and simply labeling your doctor as part of the evil of society for asking questions to protect his patients, his liability, his family and everything he owns, either professionally or personally, is painting with a pretty damn broad brush. If you're that militant about it, it's probably better you don't come see me, I could use patients who believe in a 2-way street that protects us both, rather than patients who believe I'm out to get them and don't give a damn about me, either.

Just remember, militantism will only serve to alienate you.

I fail to see how this particular survey question has one single damned thing to do with health care as it's asked? I've yet to see a disease other than lead poisoning that's created by a firearm. If the medical industry restricted their gun concern to lead poisoning, I'd see no issue with it. Does the use of a firearm trigger a blood panel for lead? No.

Safety is not the purview of the medical profession and they need to be reminded to stay in their lane. I get quite sick of this "mission creep" that is pervasive in every part of our society. Instead, they get all Ralph Nader on the subject and the reported statistics are turned into anti-gun porpoganda. Guns are not cigarettes, booze, drugs, unhealthy food or any other causative health concern. When a patient dies due to the discharge of a firearm, the industry standard answer should be " That has nothing to do with the patient's health care". If that's a problem for your industry, it's because your industry MADE it a problem! As for "your protection", when the doctor is paying me to take their surveys it becomes a two way street. Otherwise it's a straight up service provider/customer relationship. No more, no less. If the customer says the provider doesn't need to know all the intimate details of their life, then they don't.

 

[tRidiot]

Maybe i'm missing something here but is there a proven link between firearms possession and state of health? just trying to understand why you wold consider firearms ownership a "standard screening question".

I don't consider it a standard screening question. It simply is. You don't set the standard, and the standard has no solid basis in fact or evidence. It is, however, the standard, and it is the bar used to measure against in both the court of law and the court of public opinion.

As I said... if you are not risking everything you have ever worked for based on the flippant answers given in this thread, then I am not surprised if you have a stance that the question has no relevance and doesn't belong. I wouldn't expect you to. But you should know that your doctors aren't out to get you, they're just out to protect themselves and their families. If that makes them bad people or bad doctors, then by all means, find another one.

As time goes on, I find I care less and less about what many of my patients think of me. It's just not worth the hassle of jumping through 1000 hoops to try to keep everybody happy, when I've learned that at the drop of a hat, there is no loyalty and I will be thrown under the bus with every other medical professional who doesn't allow them to practice McDonald's drive-thru medicine and just order the tests and give them the pills they want. Because we're all the bad guys. Look up splitting as a defense mechanism and you will see the way 90+% of Americans feel about their healthcare providers.

I care about doing the right thing, about practicing good medicine, and about protecting myself and my family. The fact is, we as a nation have allowed things to become the way they are, they are NOT going to go back to "the good old days" and medicine has zero resemblance to what it is intended to be or used to be.

 

[abajaj11]

I'm not overlooking that at all. I just mentioned that having records of gun owners is not in and of itself only a bad thing. It can work in our favor, as well.

I completely disagree with the statement above. Firearm registration has led to confiscation too many times in history for it to not be a bad thing.
Check out this link as one of only many that shows what happens once a database is created of firearm owners.
http://www.keepandbeararms.com/information/XcIBViewItem.asp?id=195

 

[abajaj11]

I don't consider it a standard screening question. It simply is. You don't set the standard, and the standard has no solid basis in fact or evidence. It is, however, the standard, and it is the bar used to measure against in both the court of law and the court of public opinion.

As I said... if you are not risking everything you have ever worked for based on the flippant answers given in this thread, then I am not surprised if you have a stance that the question has no relevance and doesn't belong. I wouldn't expect you to. But you should know that your doctors aren't out to get you, they're just out to protect themselves and their families. If that makes them bad people or bad doctors, then by all means, find another one.

As time goes on, I find I care less and less about what many of my patients think of me. It's just not worth the hassle of jumping through 1000 hoops to try to keep everybody happy, when I've learned that at the drop of a hat, there is no loyalty and I will be thrown under the bus with every other medical professional who doesn't allow them to practice McDonald's drive-thru medicine and just order the tests and give them the pills they want. Because we're all the bad guys. Look up splitting as a defense mechanism and you will see the way 90+% of Americans feel about their healthcare providers.

I care about doing the right thing, about practicing good medicine, and about protecting myself and my family. The fact is, we as a nation have allowed things to become the way they are, they are NOT going to go back to "the good old days" and medicine has zero resemblance to what it is intended to be or used to be.

Wait till obamacare REALLY kicks in say 4 years from now, and all doctors become gummint employees like UK or Canada.
They'll be pretty much filling in forms. But, on the up side they won't be sued by the evil lawyers.
Of course our health care will go bye-bye.

 

[abajaj11]

I fail to see how this particular survey question has one single damned thing to do with health care as it's asked? I've yet to see a disease other than lead poisoning that's created by a firearm. If the medical industry restricted their gun concern to lead poisoning, I'd see no issue with it. Does the use of a firearm trigger a blood panel for lead? No.

Safety is not the purview of the medical profession and they need to be reminded to stay in their lane. I get quite sick of this "mission creep" that is pervasive in every part of our society. Instead, they get all Ralph Nader on the subject and the reported statistics are turned into anti-gun porpoganda. Guns are not cigarettes, booze, drugs, unhealthy food or any other causative health concern. When a patient dies due to the discharge of a firearm, the industry standard answer should be " That has nothing to do with the patient's health care". If that's a problem for your industry, it's because your industry MADE it a problem! As for "your protection", when the doctor is paying me to take their surveys it becomes a two way street. Otherwise it's a straight up service provider/customer relationship. No more, no less. If the customer says the provider doesn't need to know all the intimate details of their life, then they don't.

Agree completely. +1 GTG.

 

[tRidiot]

As for "your protection", when the doctor is paying me to take their surveys it becomes a two way street. Otherwise it's a straight up service provider/customer relationship. No more, no less. If the customer says the provider doesn't need to know all the intimate details of their life, then they don't.

All you have to do is say no.

If you want to get technical about it, the myriad layers of scrutiny and protection came from customers suing their practitioners for every little BS perceived wrong. If you want to sign an agreement with me as a provider saying you take all advice and treatment as voluntary and give up any right to sue me, then fine. I'll practice based on "common sense". But the fact is, common sense isn't good enough to be held as a standard in a court of law, and isn't good enough to protect me and my family. If I have to choose between getting your dander up and protecting my family's means of support and lifestyle, then you'll just have to get pissed and head elsewhere.

I've never said I agree with this crap... I'm just telling you how it IS, and how it WILL BE. And if you or anyone else thinks for a second that their feelings trump my family's livelihood or the 11 years of training it took me to get where I am, I'm sorry, but you are mistaken.

Medicine is no longer by-and-large considered a "noble profession" and almost no one out there gives a damn that doctors live in constant fear and worry of doing their best, giving up their free time and family time, working long hours at disgusting tasks and still having everything taken away by the very people they're trying to help.

I'm not surprised you or anyone else falls into the category of "I'm paying you, you do what I say." Like I said... please don't come and visit me as a patient, because you'll be leaving quite upset, I'm guessing.