Your Florida Doctor Can Ask About Your Guns

[Ben]

I've been hearing this on Fox Business all morning. Sorry for the NBC link (because the video on "ghost guns" they stuck in the middle of this story is stupid). Apparently the 11th Circuit has ruled that doctors can in fact ask about guns as part of any medical questioning. As of now you can still not answer, though I guess that will generally imply a "yes" answer to the doctor. Also that as of now at least, health insurance companies can't deny or alter coverage for gun owners.

http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/doctors-can-ask-patients-about-guns-florida-federal-court-rules-n722301

[KD5NRH]

Apparently the 11th Circuit has ruled that doctors can in fact ask about guns as part of any medical questioning.

Good; now maybe they can finally determine whether Glocks cause lameness or the other way around.

[K Frame]

There's a gun question on the forms at my doctor's office. I've never answered it, and I've never been questioned on it, but the way things are going I'm simply going to start lying.

[HankB]

There's a gun question on the forms at my doctor's office. I've never answered it, and I've never been questioned on it, but the way things are going I'm simply going to start lying.

"Just Say No" if asked whether or not you own guns - there is NO legitimate medical reason for a doctor to ask that question unless you're being treated for a bruised shoulder.

[DittoHead]

My doctor can ask me anything he wants, doesn't mean I'm going to answer him. If he asks too many dumb or irrelevant questions I'll just find another doctor. Seems easy enough to me, not sure why there had to be law about it.

[Ben]

"Just Say No" if asked whether or not you own guns - there is NO legitimate medical reason for a doctor to ask that question unless you're being treated for a bruised shoulder.

Senator Schumer: "According to the AMA, only 3% of the US population owns guns, hence a ban affects practically no one."

I only somewhat kid. I would likely check the "no" box if ever I saw such a questionnaire from my doctor. Though that relates back to my smartass remark. I was reading an article the other day regarding the inefficiency of most political polls that involve some personal information of the questioned person. Apparently polls have shown (ha ha) that people of the philosophical bent of most of us here will not participate in, or will give false information to said polls, while progressives are much more amenable to both taking polls and sharing their personal information.

One of the reasons all the Trump polls were so off, but also a way to create biased information. Strategically, it's probably better to skip the question so it can't be recorded either way (other than % not answered), though as I said, I'd likely put "no".

[MechAg94]

My doctor can ask me anything he wants, doesn't mean I'm going to answer him. If he asks too many dumb or irrelevant questions I'll just find another doctor. Seems easy enough to me, not sure why there had to be law about it.

The more things get run by the government, the more laws there will be about everything.  I think the law was in reaction to the political activism of the AMA and other groups pushing doctors to ask about guns in the first place. 

Also, given the restrictions placed on patients due to insurance requirements or few doctors taking their insurance, people are not as free to switch doctors as they ought to be. 

[MechAg94]

"There is nothing in the record suggesting that patients who are bothered or offended by such questions are psychologically unable to choose another medical provider, just as they are permitted to do if their doctor asks too many questions about private matters like sexual activity, alcohol consumption, or drug use," the court ruled.

The ruling did determine that some parts of the law could remain on the books, such as provisions allowing patients to decline to answer questions about guns and prohibiting health insurance companies from denying coverage or increasing premiums for people who lawfully own guns.

Does anyone else think that bolded portion is nonsense?  Maybe I am psychologically unable to make sense of it and move on to another thread.  

IMO, this isn't a free speech issue.  They keep trying to phrase this in terms of "gun safety" when it is the political activism that is what people were concerned about.  Maybe the law should have been written differently. 

[DittoHead]

I would prefer no laws that require or prohibit what my doctor asks me about - either way is government sticking its nose where it doesn't belong.
I'm a big boy, I can tell him it's none of his business if he asks about stuff I don't want to tell him.

[MechAg94]

I would prefer no laws that require or prohibit what my doctor asks me about - either way is government sticking its nose where it doesn't belong.
I'm a big boy, I can tell him it's none of his business if he asks about stuff I don't want to tell him.

I don't want the AMA sticking its nose in where doesn't belong either.

The judges should also be big boys and admit this has nothing to do with gun safety.  It tells me a lot about their political leanings. 

[DittoHead]

I don't want the AMA sticking its nose in where doesn't belong either.

I agree, but the AMA is a private organization (maybe a misguided one) NOT the government and as far as I'm aware there was no law saying doctors had to ask about guns.
I wouldn't want a law saying doctors have to pass out NRA pamphlets either because the government just shouldn't be involved in that.

[Ben]

I don't want the AMA sticking its nose in where doesn't belong either.

The judges should also be big boys and admit this has nothing to do with gun safety.  It tells me a lot about their political leanings. 

You could argue that it does have something to do with gun safety (the question itself, not who is asking it or why), but it has NOTHING to do with medicine. If they were asking:

"Do you have guns in the house?"
"Yes."
"Do you wear hearing and eye protection when you shoot them?"

That would be a sound medical reason for asking. When they are asking about storage, they're getting into politics. Asking personal questions about drug use, state of mind, sexual lifestyle/activity, etc. is all intensely personal, but it all has direct medical relevance*.

It's not even so much government sticking its nose into things, it's the AMA twisting medicine into politics.

*Certainly these could be twisted into political oriented questions as well, or at least the data collected could be used politically. My doctor only asks those kinds of questions verbally, and I've never seen her write them down. I've always assumed they were in preparation for annual blood and other testing and for health triggers. etc. She has never asked me about guns.

[KD5NRH]

Senator Schumer: "According to the AMA, only 3% of the US population owns guns, hence a ban affects practically no one."

President Phil Robertson: "Senator, do I need to bring up the percentage of transsexuals in the population?  Or gays wanting to be married?"

[MillCreek]

We have spoken on this issue before, and I will mention what I did then: this question is usually asked in two contexts: child safety, just like asking about swimming pool access or dangerous chemicals; and in some mental health situations, such as suicidal ideation, dementia or domestic violence. 

[MechAg94]

You could argue that it does have something to do with gun safety (the question itself, not who is asking it or why), but it has NOTHING to do with medicine. If they were asking:

"Do you have guns in the house?"
"Yes."
"Do you wear hearing and eye protection when you shoot them?"

That would be a sound medical reason for asking. When they are asking about storage, they're getting into politics. Asking personal questions about drug use, state of mind, sexual lifestyle/activity, etc. is all intensely personal, but it all has direct medical relevance*.

It's not even so much government sticking its nose into things, it's the AMA twisting medicine into politics.

*Certainly these could be twisted into political oriented questions as well, or at least the data collected could be used politically. My doctor only asks those kinds of questions verbally, and I've never seen her write them down. I've always assumed they were in preparation for annual blood and other testing and for health triggers. etc. She has never asked me about guns.

I would say it "could" have something to do with gun safety but likely does not.  If the doctor was simply providing home safety advice about a number of things, it wouldn't bother me at all.  However, the doctor does not need to ask if the patient owns guns at all to provide safety advice and information.  Just like they could provide pool safety tips without actually asking if you had a pool.  

The doctor might as well ask if you have any expensive jewelry and claim it is about burglary safety.  

Within the confines of the Doctor/Patient relationship, I can't see a reason the state can't restrict doctors from getting nosy about such things.  Doctor's already have their free speech restricted when it comes to patient information. They might have been better off simply preventing the doctor from passing on that information to anyone else or including it in patient information without good medical reason.

[MechAg94]

I wonder what would happen if the doctor's were asking if patients were Muslim?

[Tuco]

Good; now maybe they can finally determine whether Glocks cause lameness or the other way around.

When you're hot you're hot.

[Hawkmoon]

IMO, this isn't a free speech issue.  They keep trying to phrase this in terms of "gun safety" when it is the political activism that is what people were concerned about.  Maybe the law should have been written differently. 

They don't promote it as a "gun safety" issue, they promote it as a "public health" issue -- which it isn't. Massachusetts is on a parallel path:

http://www.usnews.com/news/massachusetts/articles/2017-02-13/program-to-help-doctors-discuss-gun-safety-with-patients

[AmbulanceDriver]

Kaiser has a health questionnaire for our kids checkups.  It asks specifically, "Is there a gun in your home?"  

I can truthfully answer no.

[Ben]

Kaiser has a health questionnaire for our kids checkups.  It asks specifically, "Is there a gun in your home?"  

I can truthfully answer no.

 

[dogmush]

I wonder what would happen if the doctor's were asking if patients were Muslim?

They do.  I've seen several Dr's forms with a spot for "Religious Preference".



I live in FL, and I'm pretty dang pro gun, but I didn't like this law when it came out, and am happy to see it overturned. I'm a grown ass human, and don't need the State protecting me from my own damn doctor.  I can say yes, no, or FOAD on my own.  LESS government direction in our lives. That's the goal.

If you are worried about the AMA being anti (a valid concern) go with FOAD on the question.  Tell your doctor that you see the fact that he's asking the question as colluding with people you don't support, and he's not going to treat you and your family.

[MillCreek]

I wonder what would happen if the doctor's were asking if patients were Muslim?

We ask the patient's religious preference, if the patients want to tell us. For example, if the patient is a Jehovah's Witness, there is a good chance they will not accept blood or blood products, and that is relevant to their care.

[BlueStarLizzard]

As Millcreek points out, there are relevant reasons for a doctor to ask many questions that may not be obviously medical in nature. (and I just thought of another one for guns, which would be lead and chemical exposures)

I just wish both the medical establishment and the general populace would smarten up and through politics out the window when it came to a lot of these types of questions. All it does is lower the standards of care and resources available to the patient.

[MechAg94]

I disagree that doctors need to ask if you personally own anything in order to bring up the subject of safety with that thing.  I can understand doctor's not taking chances on religion because some fool won't mention religious restrictions then sue later over it. 

I can see using BigGov to shut up doctors is not the answer.  I would tell my doctor where to shove it.  I would be concerned about people on medicare or some such that have trouble finding a doctor that will take them.  More BS that is wrong with our current system.

[Hawkmoon]

I disagree that doctors need to ask if you personally own anything in order to bring up the subject of safety with that thing.  I can understand doctor's not taking chances on religion because some fool won't mention religious restrictions then sue later over it.  

I can see using BigGov to shut up doctors is not the answer.  I would tell my doctor where to shove it.  I would be concerned about people on medicare or some such that have trouble finding a doctor that will take them.  More BS that is wrong with our current system.

That's the problem -- many people have limited choices regarding physicians. Plus, as I've noted before, we can't control if a doctor or a PA interprets a non-answer as a "Yes" and enters it as such on the chart. If you then change doctors ... more than likely you'll ask for a copy of your record to be transmitted to the new doctor, and now you have two doctors and two office staffs who know (or think they know) that you have guns.

A doctor doesn't need to know about guns to address specific issues. If a blood test comes back showing elevated blood lead levels (as mine did a few years ago), the doctor might then be justified in asking where I was being exposed to lead. But he/she doesn't really need to know where/how I'm being exposed -- he/she really only needs to alert me that my blood lead level is elevated and that I should do something to reduce my exposure to lead. A simple answer might be "I don't know, let me think about it" or "I sometimes work with lead in my shop at home, I'll cut back on the soldering and do something about ventilation." End of discussion.