Rick Scott (R-moran) Signs Controversial Anti-Pediatrician Gun Law

[jpak]

http://pediatrics.about.com/b/2011/06/04/rick-scott-signs-controversial-gun-law.htm

Governor Rick Scott signed a controversial Florida gun law this week. Ironically, he signed it on one of the first days of National Home Safety Month.

It is now illegal in Florida for pediatricians to routinely ask parents if they have a gun in their home, which we often do, as unsecured guns are considered a big safety hazard. Educating parents about the dangers of unsecured guns and the importance of properly storing guns, in addition to other safety advice, is considered to be an important way to help keep kids safe and is routine, especially at well child exams.

Opponents of the gun law, including the American Academy of Pediatrics, Florida Pediatric Society, Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence, American Academy of Family Physicians, and the American College of Physicians, urged Gov. Scott to veto the bill.

Notably absent from that lists of opponents is the Florida Medical Association, even though they were against the original bill, with the FMA's general counsel Jeff Scott even saying that, "As written, the bill is absolutely unacceptable, and we will fight it." What made the Florida Medical Association change their stance on this bill? It will be interesting to find out, as changes to the bill did not make it acceptable to any of the other medical groups.

<more>

[buddysmellgood]

1. The NRA should want pediatricians to ask this. Isn't the NRA

concerned with safety? Also, seems like a free speech issue.

[derby378]

2. The pediatrician in question refused to treat children of a FL gun owner

All she did was hesitate to answer the question, IIRC. She hadn't arrived at "Yes" or "No" when she and her children were told to get out of the doctor's office.

There is a simple workaround, however. A pediatrician can simply offer a brochure on gun safety in a home with children to all new patients and their families. Doesn't put anyone on the spot, and it protects the right of families to not declare if they own firearms.

[jpak]

3. Was that illegal or unconstitutional? - nope

But this law is unconstitutional and anti-public health

The GOP/NRA can suck it

yup

[The Doctor.]

14. Just unethical.

Now they have to make it illegal for doctors to ask if there are cleaning supplies, matches, and pools at the home.

:eyes:

Seriously, singling out one hazard is just stupid.

[jpak]

15. It is highly ethical

yup

[The Doctor.]

23. No, it's not. A physician cannot refuse care to a patient except under specific

circumstances.

If a doctor simply does not want to treat someone on moral grounds, then they have to give notice with a reasonable amount of time for that patient to seek another caregiver.

Your gun-hatred appears to dictate your reasoning.

Under your reasoning, it is just as ethical for a doctor to refuse to treat someone because they are gay. I know, you'll say 'But guns are DANGEROUS!', well, some people feel 'teh gay' is 'dangerous' too. You're in the exact same morality boat they are when you say things like this.

[PavePusher]

29. And the same ignorance boat.

Must be big boats....

[discntnt_irny_srcsm]

27. And your background in ethics is....

...what?

[PavePusher]

30. I'm surprised s/he knows the word, or can spell it.

S/he certainly doesn't seem to know the meaning....

[discntnt_irny_srcsm]

31. I must confess...

...I am frequently underwhelmed by......

...many...aspects.

[rl6214]

40. HA

No actually you are the one that is going to have to suck it because he signed the bill. How's that backlash of yours coming along?

[petronius]

17. Have the medical organzations opposing the bill made any statement about that doctor's behavior?

Given the easy solution you mention, I'd expect they'd be at least as concerned about unwarranted denial of care as they are about perceived infringements on their ability to provide care... :shrug:

[RSillsbee]

25. The above is untrue

All she did was hesitate to answer the question, IIRC. She hadn't arrived at "Yes" or "No" when she and her children were told to get out of the doctor's office.

The Doctor followed established guidelines and told the patient, at the end of the appointment, that he was terminating services and that the patient had 30 day to find a new Physician. A Doctor can't just throw you out in the middle of an appointment or they can be sued for patient abandonment.

There are very specific guidelines that a Physician must meet before dismissing a patient.

That said, for once I agree w/ Jpak it's a dumb law I'd be OK w/ "The Dr. can't dismiss you for refusal to answer." but not "They can't even ask."

Add quote

[The Wielding Truth]

4. It seems obvious to me that they are more concerned with sales.

[PavePusher]

7. Huh? Explain, please? n/t

[The Wielding Truth]

11. The NRA is more interested in saving their gun sales than preventing

harm to children.

[ergot]

13. Can you direct me to the NRA gun sales site? I'd like to buy some.

:eyes:

[The Wielding Truth]

18. What is it that I'm not getting across? If the doctor is asking and discouraging guns

in the house with children, then guns sales will go down. The NRA will DO anything to push sales NOT discourage them. That is why they are not interested in safety first.

This post is in answer to Reply#1;why NRA is not standing for safety in this case.

[shadowrider]

19. Sit down, take a breath, clear your mind

Look at your previous post. You said, and I quote, "The NRA is more interested in saving their gun sales than preventing"

You were simply asked where the NRA gun sales site was based on the above statement.

[The Wielding Truth]

34. I thought it was obvious who sponsors the NRA. Okay here is a site.

http://www.friendsofnra.org/corporate-sponsors.aspx


Who really thinks that the all their lobbyists and special events are paid by membership dues?

[gejohnston]

36. Since gun accidents with childern are in the two or low three digits

per year (CDC as a source) vs say cars, then AAA (who opposes money on mass transit) must really have children when you look at the thousands that are killed by cars in their own yards.

[The Wielding Truth]

37. Yes, there should be a data base of gun accidents in the home.

[PavePusher]

38. ???? n/t

[gejohnston]

48. There is a data base

the numbers are that low depending the age groupings.

[shadowrider]

45. Which doesn't answer the question n/t

[friendly_iconoclast]

35. What you are attempting to "get across" is untrue. The NRA *has* a safety program...

...unlike those 'concerned' people at the VPC and Brady Campaign:

http://www.nrahq.org/safety/eddie/

...Begun in 1988, The Eddie Eagle GunSafe® Program has reached more than 21 million children -- in all 50 states. This program was developed through the combined efforts of such qualified professionals as clinical psychologists, reading specialists, teachers, curriculum specialists, urban housing safety officials, and law enforcement personnel.

Anyone may teach The Eddie Eagle GunSafe® Program, and NRA membership is not required. The program may be readily incorporated into existing school curriculum, taught in a one- to five-day format, and used to reach both levels or simply one or two grades. Materials available through this program are: student workbooks, 7-minute animated video (available on DVD or VHS), instructor guides, brochures, and student reward stickers. Program materials are also available in Spanish.

The NRA is committed to helping keep America's young children safe. In efforts to do so, we offer our program at a nominal fee. Schools, law enforcement agencies, hospitals, daycare centers, and libraries may be eligible to receive grant funding to defray program costs. Grant funding is available in many states to these groups to cover the cost of all program curriculum materials.

The purpose of the Eddie Eagle Program isn't to teach whether guns are good or bad, but rather to promote the protection and safety of children. The program makes no value judgments about firearms, and no firearms are ever used in the program. Like swimming pools, electrical outlets, matchbooks and household poison, they're treated simply as a fact of everyday life. With firearms found in about half of all American households, it's a stance that makes sense....

Looks like hatred of the NRA has fucked up your google-fu

[krispos42]

46. It is not the doctor's place to discourage people from owning guns.

That is political activism, not medical practice.


If the doctor is asking about stairs and discouraging people from buying and living in homes with them, I'd get a bit cranky, too. Or pools. Or hot tubs. Or living in certain neighborhoods.

[PavePusher]

20. The NRA has little or nothing to do with gun sales.

Unless, of course, you can cite evidence to the contrary?

[Name removed]

22. Deleted message

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[PavePusher]

5. There is nothing in the law that bars doctors from asking....

if their patient would like some gun safety information.

They are simply barred from asking about ownership, and predicating delivery of care on the answer.

Not too onerous, is it?

[derby378]

49. That's the way I see it

No muss, no fuss.

[Guilded Lilly]

6. Anything that Scott does these days is simply anti-people.

Unless, of course that *person* is a corporation with lots of pro-conservative campaign money.

[PavePusher]

8. Protecting the rights and privacy of patients is "anti-people"?

Please, explain that one...

[sharesunited]

9. Refusing to knowingly abet an unsafe household would seem to be a doctor's perogative.

[ergot]

12. Would his prerogatives include prying into the home's flood insurance coverage

and the vaccination status of their dog (rabies can be very deadly)?

[sharesunited]

16. These are apparently not perceived by the profession to carry the same risk of death and injury.

[ergot]

32. Well then perhaps you could persuade the AMA to let you write a corollary to the Hippocratic Oath

that would properly address all potential dangers and their appropriate response to them...according to your own personal notions. They might even pay you. (And I might be the King of Atlantis)

edit for minor typo

[CelticThunder]

21. Scott doesn't give a goddamn SHIT about patients' rights and privacy.

[PavePusher]

28. So, why sign this legislation? What other point does it have? n/t

[eqfan592]

42. You see, some folks...

...only care about privacy and rights when it is their own privacy and rights that are being affected. Since they don't choose to exercise their right to own a firearm, they don't care about those who do having their rights and privacy violated.

This is somehow a progressive way of thinking......

[Name removed]

10. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[petronius]

24. Even at second-hand, I really don't think that word has any place at DU (nt)

[lawodevolution]

26. Good news

Pediatricians do a bad job addressing gun safety with their patients and their parents. Normally they ask, the parent lies and says they don't have guns and then the parents don't get the information. Now that doctors have to hand out information and assume everyone owns guns, proper gun safety will be taught. Once again the NRA promotes true gun safety. One reason why they don't give out gun safety data to all parents is their true agenda is to get parents to get rid of guns while gun safety data will give parents the idea that gun ownership is still legitimate, although most people don't care about what a doctor has to say about the issue.

[spin]

33. The solution is simple ...

just pass out brochures that discuss gun safety and how to kid proof firearms. You can child proof a firearm very cheaply and still have it available for self defense if necessary.

If the patients ask questions about firearm storage, answer them honestly without unnecessary bias against firearms.

The same thing should be done about swimming pools, household chemicals and car seats for children.

[lawodevolution]

43. exactly. To them, the problem with your idea is that it legitimizes gun ownership.

The anti-gun people do not care about reducing gun accident rates and would be thrilled if they increased because it would give them more stats to use. Anti-gun people only hate guns. If you tell parents to sell their guns, then you may someday actually talk a parent into selling their guns; however, if you legitimize gun ownership by explaining to them it is ok to own a gun and there are ways to keep them safe from children, some parents who had decided not to own guns, may go out and buy some and get a gun safe.

The anti-gun crowd are willing to allow a few extra children die in gun accidents (to boost their membership and income) in order to further their Agenda (or benefit their wallet). Anytime a form of corruption is possible it will occur at least somewhere, sometime. A corrupt anti-gun group or member would benefit from more gun accidents and more deaths and therefore it is certainty that at some point, somewhere one of them will commit an action that is designed to bring about more gun deaths. This is an absolute certainty because humans are not perfect and corruption is sure to exist anywhere.

[Paladin]

39. Another Far-Right Wing Pin-Up Boy For The Gun Militancy Movement

Go ahead, DU Gun Enthusiasts---run that "being pro-gun is a LIBERAL concept" line past us one more time, just for laughs.....

[eqfan592]

41. It is...

...even if many liberals have their heads buried too deeply in the sand to realize it.

Now you tell me how doctors tossing gun owning patients out of their office without notice is a ethical, much less a liberal, practice.

It seems many so called progressives let their sanity fly out the window when it comes to the issue of firearms. That so many can't see why these doctors were in the wrong just underscores that. No progressive would put up with that sort of behavior with any other topic other than firearms.

[lawodevolution]

44. Gun freedom is liberal. It is liberal to allow people the freedom to defend the self.

Go ahead and run that "Another Far-Right Wing Pin-Up Boy For The Gun Militancy Movement" temper tantrum again if you want.

[X_Digger]

47. AAP? This AAP?

http://books.google.com/books?id=M-NIaWoUPucC&pg=PA470&lpg=PA470&dq=We+believe+that+handguns,+deadly+air+guns+and+assault+weapons+should+be+banned&source=bl&ots=hKzrq7Ewq8&sig=54PPNwCwO0JUpt6-LD0MDsouiBQ&hl=en&ei=WyTLTbihAcS5tgeV48WKCA&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1&ved=0CBYQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=handguns%20banned&f=false

The American Academy of Pediatrics strongly supports gun-control legislation. We believe that handguns, deadly air guns and assault weapons should be banned.

Until handguns are banned, we recommend that handguns and handgun ammunition be regulated, that restrictions be placed on handgun ownership, and that the number of privately owned handguns be reduced.

I don't agree with the bill, but I feel no sympathy for the AAP.

[Euromutt]

50. Unsurprisingly, I'm in total agreement with you

I think this legislation is akin to swatting a mosquito with a sledgehammer but the AAP is hardly in a position to whinge that their anti-gun agenda provoked a response.

[Bold Lib]

51. Would this bill be considered "back lash" that we are constantly being warned about?