Florida Wants to Kill Kids

[The Rabbi]

"He said he asks such questions of all his patients because if there are guns in a home with children, he advises that parents lock them away so children don't hurt themselves."

Ya....that's HORRIBLE advice!! How dare he suggest such a terrible thing.

.

Yup, that is horrible advice. Glad you see it that way now.

BUt I'll bet you're too ******* stupid to explain why.

It's true he could just give blanket advice to everyone without ever asking the specific questions, which is probably what the new pediatrician's approach will be... Sometimes it's just personality and approach aren't a good match, but still no reason to OUTLAW the question in a private professional relationship...

So you're OK with an authority figure giving advice on matters he knows nothing about that could lead to bad consequences?

 

[DaGoose]

"He said he asks such questions of all his patients because if there are guns in a home with children, he advises that parents lock them away so children don't hurt themselves."

Ya....that's HORRIBLE advice!! How dare he suggest such a terrible thing.

.

Yup, that is horrible advice. Glad you see it that way now.

BUt I'll bet you're too ******* stupid to explain why.

.............but still no reason to OUTLAW the question in a private professional relationship...

It is for the "nanny staters" who rely on the government.

.

 

[Valerie]

Yup, that is horrible advice. Glad you see it that way now.

BUt I'll bet you're too ******* stupid to explain why.

It's true he could just give blanket advice to everyone without ever asking the specific questions, which is probably what the new pediatrician's approach will be... Sometimes it's just personality and approach aren't a good match, but still no reason to OUTLAW the question in a private professional relationship...

So you're OK with an authority figure giving advice on matters he knows nothing about that could lead to bad consequences?

He's a licensed medical professional, a pediatrician who is asking a question not as an authority figure, but as an advocate for child health and safety...

 

[asterism]

For crying out loud!! Didn't you even read the link in your own OP that I've already referred to once before? You make it sound like the doctor is gonna be teaching a course or something.

This specific Pediatrician's justification is so that he can instruct his patients.

From YOUR OP....



.

A situation allowed by the new law. In the case of this specific situation, what about that 4 month old child made him vulnerable to suicide?

The new law.......

Anyone who supports this "law" need never complain about the "nanny state" or "government over reach". As was stated before if the patient doesn't like the questions the doctor asks then they have the right to seek out another doctor.

Obviously we differ on the proper role the government should play in our lives. Let's just say that I prefer the government protect our individual rights over the rights of a nosy professional to keep records on gun ownership. Nothing is stopping Pediatricians from practicing medicine. This stops them from being active or passive agents in an anti-gun political agenda.

 

[R.D.]

Ocala woman refused service from pediatrician for gun | Ocala.com

“What's safer for my child, to let the question go or discharge my children to another pediatrician?” he added. ( Tom Ullman, the father, asked)

Good question - and points to the hypocrisy of the Dr. in this case

I don't think it's hypocritical at all to say, hey this relationship isn't going to work out since you're not willing to communicate with me about the safety of your child.

The doctor has a right to refuse patients and he gave them 30 days to find someone they would feel more comfortable with going forward... The child's health was never compromised by his decision to let them go to another practice...



He said the doctor and patient have to develop a relationship of trust and that if parents won't answer such basic safety questions, how could they trust each other about more important health issues.


Sounds like the parents were just overly paranoid and I don't blame people for being concerned about their privacy, but the proper solution for the state legislators would be to ease the public concern about the insurance company or the state regulators and establish they have NO right to this private information.

Instead the state took the backward approach to OUTLAW a certain question by professionals who are medically trained advocates for child health and safety, which is overreaching, foolish, and downright paranoid...

Parents gun ownership has nothing to do with the relationship of a pediatrician and the child's health. The entire premise is false. It's intrusive and the Dr. rejecting a patient over such a trivial matter only further suggests the Dr.'s intentions are a power play and nothing medical at all in this case.

The mother had the choice of lying or being honest. Being honest cost her a Dr. If she lied the choice would have been hers to continue the relationship based on their history and his qualifications. As it should have been in my opinion

Of course the Dr. has a right to refuse patients, pretending he is kind by giving them time is just another instance of bloated ego on his part

 

[asterism]

For crying out loud!! Didn't you even read the link in your own OP that I've already referred to once before? You make it sound like the doctor is gonna be teaching a course or something.

From YOUR OP....



.

That doesn't answer the question as to what qualifies the doctor to give advice on gun safety.
The answer is that he is not qualified. So why should he do it?

"He said he asks such questions of all his patients because if there are guns in a home with children, he advises that parents lock them away so children don't hurt themselves."

Ya....that's HORRIBLE advice!! How dare he suggest such a terrible thing.

.

I guess it depends on the lock and whether it will actually be sufficient to keep children from hurting themselves. It's better to specify that guns be locked in a safe that only adults can open as well as teach children to always treat guns as loaded deadly weapons, never as toys, and to instruct them on the proper way to deal with any encounter with any firearm. He obviously is not familiar with gun safety best practices. Perhaps it's because he has no training in that field.

But then again this is a Florida doctor who by his own admission only inquires about pool safety during the summer (pools are dangerous all year long) and by his own admission does not recommend infant water safety programs. That's probably because Medical School does not qualify him as a pool safety expert either.

 

[Valerie]

This specific Pediatrician's justification is so that he can instruct his patients.



A situation allowed by the new law. In the case of this specific situation, what about that 4 month old child made him vulnerable to suicide?

The new law.......

Anyone who supports this "law" need never complain about the "nanny state" or "government over reach". As was stated before if the patient doesn't like the questions the doctor asks then they have the right to seek out another doctor.

Obviously we differ on the proper role the government should play in our lives. Let's just say that I prefer the government protect our individual rights over the rights of a nosy professional to keep records on gun ownership. Nothing is stopping Pediatricians from practicing medicine. This stops them from being active or passive agents in an anti-gun political agenda.

The doctor is NOT asking the question just to compile a record of gun ownership! That is the paranoia setting in... The government is proposing to intrude on this private relationship by outlawing a certain question.

 

[asterism]

Ocala woman refused service from pediatrician for gun | Ocala.com

“What's safer for my child, to let the question go or discharge my children to another pediatrician?” he added. ( Tom Ullman, the father, asked)

Good question - and points to the hypocrisy of the Dr. in this case

I don't think it's hypocritical at all to say, hey this relationship isn't going to work out since you're not willing to communicate with me about the safety of your child.

The doctor has a right to refuse patients and he gave them 30 days to find someone they would feel more comfortable with going forward... The child's health was never compromised by his decision to let them go to another practice...



He said the doctor and patient have to develop a relationship of trust and that if parents won't answer such basic safety questions, how could they trust each other about more important health issues.


Sounds like the parents were just overly paranoid and I don't blame people for being concerned about their privacy, but the proper solution for the state legislators would be to ease the public concern about the insurance company or the state regulators and establish they have NO right to this private information.

Instead the state took the backward approach to OUTLAW a certain question by professionals who are medically trained advocates for child health and safety, which is overreaching, foolish, and downright paranoid...

Medically trained advocates for child health and safety are incorrect about the safest environment for a child. It's not a gun-free house.

 

[asterism]

The new law.......

Anyone who supports this "law" need never complain about the "nanny state" or "government over reach". As was stated before if the patient doesn't like the questions the doctor asks then they have the right to seek out another doctor.

Obviously we differ on the proper role the government should play in our lives. Let's just say that I prefer the government protect our individual rights over the rights of a nosy professional to keep records on gun ownership. Nothing is stopping Pediatricians from practicing medicine. This stops them from being active or passive agents in an anti-gun political agenda.

The doctor is NOT asking the question just to compile a record of gun ownership! That is the paranoia setting in... The government is proposing to intrude on this private relationship by outlawing a certain question.

The operative word there is "just." This new law does not outlaw a certain question. It prohibits doctors from keeping records of gun owners and it prohibits the question being asked without a medical basis.

 

[The Rabbi]

"He said he asks such questions of all his patients because if there are guns in a home with children, he advises that parents lock them away so children don't hurt themselves."

Ya....that's HORRIBLE advice!! How dare he suggest such a terrible thing.

.

Yup, that is horrible advice. Glad you see it that way now.

BUt I'll bet you're too ******* stupid to explain why.

And if I did you'd be too ******* stupid to understand it. Anyone who thinks it's Ok to have loaded guns just laying around the house with little children around has a definite lack of common sense.


.

So in other words, you are too ******* stupid to explain why.
Thanks for clearing that up.

 

[The Rabbi]

It's true he could just give blanket advice to everyone without ever asking the specific questions, which is probably what the new pediatrician's approach will be... Sometimes it's just personality and approach aren't a good match, but still no reason to OUTLAW the question in a private professional relationship...

So you're OK with an authority figure giving advice on matters he knows nothing about that could lead to bad consequences?

He's a licensed medical professional, a pediatrician who is asking a question not as an authority figure, but as an advocate for child health and safety...

You don't think a doctor is an authority figure?
And a doctor is not an "advocate" for anything. He is there to treat illness.
Again, what special training does a doctor have that would qualify him to give advice on this subject?

 

[Valerie]

Good question - and points to the hypocrisy of the Dr. in this case

I don't think it's hypocritical at all to say, hey this relationship isn't going to work out since you're not willing to communicate with me about the safety of your child.

The doctor has a right to refuse patients and he gave them 30 days to find someone they would feel more comfortable with going forward... The child's health was never compromised by his decision to let them go to another practice...



He said the doctor and patient have to develop a relationship of trust and that if parents won't answer such basic safety questions, how could they trust each other about more important health issues.


Sounds like the parents were just overly paranoid and I don't blame people for being concerned about their privacy, but the proper solution for the state legislators would be to ease the public concern about the insurance company or the state regulators and establish they have NO right to this private information.

Instead the state took the backward approach to OUTLAW a certain question by professionals who are medically trained advocates for child health and safety, which is overreaching, foolish, and downright paranoid...

Parents gun ownership has nothing to do with the relationship of a pediatrician and the child's health. The entire premise is false. It's intrusive and the Dr. rejecting a patient over such a trivial matter only further suggests the Dr.'s intentions are a power play and nothing medical at all in this case.

The mother had the choice of lying or being honest. Being honest cost her a Dr. If she lied the choice would have been hers to continue the relationship based on their history and his qualifications. As it should have been in my opinion

Of course the Dr. has a right to refuse patients, pretending he is kind by giving them time is just another instance of bloated ego on his part

I disagree that advocating for child safety is not part of the qualified role of a pediatrician, and 30 days has nothing to do with ego, it is just the proper course of action under the circumstances. Sometimes the personality or approach aren't a good match for a healthy relationship and most people move on without incident. There is no real need to be paranoid and ask the government to OUTLAW the question aimed at protecting the child, it's just ludicrous IMO.

 

[Valerie]

Obviously we differ on the proper role the government should play in our lives. Let's just say that I prefer the government protect our individual rights over the rights of a nosy professional to keep records on gun ownership. Nothing is stopping Pediatricians from practicing medicine. This stops them from being active or passive agents in an anti-gun political agenda.

The doctor is NOT asking the question just to compile a record of gun ownership! That is the paranoia setting in... The government is proposing to intrude on this private relationship by outlawing a certain question.

The operative word there is "just." This new law does not outlaw a certain question. It prohibits doctors from keeping records of gun owners and it prohibits the question being asked without a medical basis.

A doctor compiles a medical record for each patient which is PRIVATE unless or until the state regulators say otherwise. Doctors do not ask about guns for the purpose of compiling or cataloging gun owners. They ask for the purpose of communicating with families about child safety in the home.

Why can't the state merely reinforce the privacy of that relationship and outlaw any such intrusion rather than the state imposing itself on this private relationship...?

Last week, the state legislature approved a bill that would make it legal to impose punishment on doctors who ask about guns kept in the home. The bill awaits approval from Florida Gov. Rick Scott, who is known to support gun rights and will likely sign the bill, said Dr. Louis St. Petery, a pediatrician in Tallahassee, Fla., and executive vice president of the Florida Pediatric Society.


Similar legislation has been proposed in Virginia, West Virginia, Alabama and North Carolina.

Supporters of the Florida bill, including the National Rifle Association (NRA), say they want to stop doctors from invading their privacy, and are concerned the information may be used against them by insurance companies.




Pediatricians have some stark numbers to back up their concerns:

A gun in the home is 43 times more likely to kill someone known to the family than it is to kill someone in self-defense, according to the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP). And many victims of accidental gun injuries and death are under age 25, research has shown. Further, states with the most guns at home have suicide rates double rates of states with the fewest guns, and those suicides are often children.

Pediatricians argue it's vital to ask about guns in the home so they can advise parents about risks and make sure the guns are stored properly, all in order to prevent injury and death in children.

"For pediatricians, prevention is the name of the game," St. Petery said.

"We're not out there to rid the state of guns," said St. Petery, who also owns a gun at home and raised three children. "We're out to be sure if parents have guns that they are aware," of how to safely store it, he said. More than one-third of American homes have at least one gun at home, but a 2007 study found 70 percent of guns are not stored safely.


If the law passes, parents could report doctors who inquire about gun ownership to the Florida State Medical Board. The board can then impose disciplinary action, which may go as far as taking away the doctor's license to practice medicine.

As a compromise, doctors can ask about gun ownership if they think the child is in imminent danger. But pediatricians say this wording is subject to interpretation, and they object to being penalized for doing something they believe to be in the best interest of the child.

Critics: New Gun Law Will Kill Kids - Yahoo! News

 

[DaGoose]

The new law.......

Anyone who supports this "law" need never complain about the "nanny state" or "government over reach". As was stated before if the patient doesn't like the questions the doctor asks then they have the right to seek out another doctor.

Obviously we differ on the proper role the government should play in our lives. Let's just say that I prefer the government protect our individual rights over the rights of a nosy professional to keep records on gun ownership. Nothing is stopping Pediatricians from practicing medicine. This stops them from being active or passive agents in an anti-gun political agenda.

The doctor is NOT asking the question just to compile a record of gun ownership! That is the paranoia setting in... The government is proposing to intrude on this private relationship by outlawing a certain question.

I think you hit the nail squarely on the head here. This whole thread is about fanatical paranoia and advocating for government over reach and nothing else.

Therse are the same irrationally fearful people that see "boogey men" behind every tree and, though they claim otherwise, actually support an over reaching, activist government.



.

 

[R.D.]

The new law.......

Anyone who supports this "law" need never complain about the "nanny state" or "government over reach". As was stated before if the patient doesn't like the questions the doctor asks then they have the right to seek out another doctor.

Obviously we differ on the proper role the government should play in our lives. Let's just say that I prefer the government protect our individual rights over the rights of a nosy professional to keep records on gun ownership. Nothing is stopping Pediatricians from practicing medicine. This stops them from being active or passive agents in an anti-gun political agenda.

The doctor is NOT asking the question just to compile a record of gun ownership! That is the paranoia setting in... The government is proposing to intrude on this private relationship by outlawing a certain question.

You don't know that.

Any Dr. as well as any one servicing the public may post posters, banners and warnings regarding the saftey issues involved with gun ownership. The message gets across without asking personal questions unrelated to how a four month old health is progressing.

He can also simply state as matter of fact gun, pool , drinking bleach, and playing in the street safety measures without questioning if it is that important a topic to him

 

[asterism]

The doctor is NOT asking the question just to compile a record of gun ownership! That is the paranoia setting in... The government is proposing to intrude on this private relationship by outlawing a certain question.

The operative word there is "just." This new law does not outlaw a certain question. It prohibits doctors from keeping records of gun owners and it prohibits the question being asked without a medical basis.

A doctor compiles a medical record for each patient which is PRIVATE unless or until the state regulators say otherwise. Doctors do not ask about guns for the purpose of compiling or cataloging gun owners. They ask for the purpose of communicating with families about child safety in the home.

Why can't the state merely reinforce the privacy of that relationship and outlaw any such intrusion rather than the state imposing itself on this private relationship...?

Because the existing laws covering that area are insufficient in the eyes of those who have elected these representatives.

Last week, the state legislature approved a bill that would make it legal to impose punishment on doctors who ask about guns kept in the home. The bill awaits approval from Florida Gov. Rick Scott, who is known to support gun rights and will likely sign the bill, said Dr. Louis St. Petery, a pediatrician in Tallahassee, Fla., and executive vice president of the Florida Pediatric Society.


Similar legislation has been proposed in Virginia, West Virginia, Alabama and North Carolina.

Supporters of the Florida bill, including the National Rifle Association (NRA), say they want to stop doctors from invading their privacy, and are concerned the information may be used against them by insurance companies.




Pediatricians have some stark numbers to back up their concerns:

A gun in the home is 43 times more likely to kill someone known to the family than it is to kill someone in self-defense, according to the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP). And many victims of accidental gun injuries and death are under age 25, research has shown. Further, states with the most guns at home have suicide rates double rates of states with the fewest guns, and those suicides are often children.

Pediatricians argue it's vital to ask about guns in the home so they can advise parents about risks and make sure the guns are stored properly, all in order to prevent injury and death in children.

"For pediatricians, prevention is the name of the game," St. Petery said.

"We're not out there to rid the state of guns," said St. Petery, who also owns a gun at home and raised three children. "We're out to be sure if parents have guns that they are aware," of how to safely store it, he said. More than one-third of American homes have at least one gun at home, but a 2007 study found 70 percent of guns are not stored safely.


If the law passes, parents could report doctors who inquire about gun ownership to the Florida State Medical Board. The board can then impose disciplinary action, which may go as far as taking away the doctor's license to practice medicine.

As a compromise, doctors can ask about gun ownership if they think the child is in imminent danger. But pediatricians say this wording is subject to interpretation, and they object to being penalized for doing something they believe to be in the best interest of the child.

Critics: New Gun Law Will Kill Kids - Yahoo! News

The AAP is not an authoritative source on gun safety nor has it made public the methodology and the data used to make such statistical claims. Therefore it has no merit. The AAP also claims "The best way to keep your children safe from injury or death from guns is to NEVER have a gun in the home." That is simply not true. Education is the best way to keep children safe from injury or death from guns. The AAP has not considered the accidental deaths and injuries suffered by children with guns outside the home nor has the AAP studied the death and injury rates of guns stored in locked gun safes. The AAP has not studied the death and injury rates of children who have been taught basic firearm safety.

 

[asterism]

Obviously we differ on the proper role the government should play in our lives. Let's just say that I prefer the government protect our individual rights over the rights of a nosy professional to keep records on gun ownership. Nothing is stopping Pediatricians from practicing medicine. This stops them from being active or passive agents in an anti-gun political agenda.

The doctor is NOT asking the question just to compile a record of gun ownership! That is the paranoia setting in... The government is proposing to intrude on this private relationship by outlawing a certain question.

You don't know that.

Any Dr. as well as any one servicing the public may post posters, banners and warnings regarding the saftey issues involved with gun ownership. The message gets across without asking personal questions unrelated to how a four month old health is progressing.

He can also simply state as matter of fact gun, pool , drinking bleach, and playing in the street safety measures without questioning if it is that important a topic to him

The tactics being used by the opponents of this law show their agenda. They advocate doctor privacy over patient privacy, they are trying to marginalize a valid role of the government protecting Constitutional rights, and they are accusing those who support this role as having a mental illness.

These are probably the same people who don't want a bank reporting large financial transactions due to some right to privacy and fear that the government knowing where this money goes is going to be used against them. Even though there are existing regulations that explicitly cover financial transaction disclosure.

 

[BlindBoo]

Are you advocating using the power of the state to forbid them from asking a question to which no one is claiming they are entitled an answer?

Hey, aren't you libs the same people who are all for Cops not being allowed to ask criminals questions without a Lawyer present? If so, why the hell should we be allowing a Doctor to ask children (who do not have the ability to understand whether the question is appropriate or not) questions like this without a parent in attendance? YES, I'm equating what these doctors are doing to the police improperly questioning a suspect.

What the hell? Where in the article is that? Do you allow you child to be examined by the doctor alone?

"Florida could become the first state to limit pediatricians' ability to ask parents whether they own a gun"

"Florida is set to become the first state to pass a law that would limit doctors' ability to council parents about gun safety in the home"

Lovely little statist! Gov-ment needs to protect you from the bad doctors asking you questions.....hahahahahaha. When did the Republican brand become synonomus with statist pussies?

 

[BlindBoo]

You seem to have missed my point. The T and yourself are angry that doctors ask a certain question. So instead of following the "free market" and simply going to a different doctor, you're going to use the government to force doctors to not be able to ask certain things. However, not only are you affecting your own relationship with your doctor but everybody else's at the same time.

You know, if this was actually about children's safety I might have a different opinion on the matter Modbert, but this has been an ongoing attempt by the American Medical Association to push their Anti-Gun agenda for the better part of a decade now. It's about POLITICS, and that's something CHILDREN should not be forced into the middle of.

So my question is why do you hate the free market and why are you trying to interfere with the visits between my doctor and I?

You can feel free to tell your doctor whatever you damn well please. These doctors are not asking adults. They're asking CHILDREN, who most often are not going to know that they have the Right to refuse to answer the question and in fact should do exactly that. Then again so far as I'm concerned any parent who leaves their kid alone with a doctor is a moron to begin with.

Furthermore, Abortion being murder is your opinion. The ongoing debate of when life begins is still going on. Let's put aside personal opinions for a moment and consider the argument that Abortion is not murder. In this case, you are also for the government not minding it's own business and forcing doctors to do certain things.

Very true. I am DEFINITELY for the government enforcing a standard of Morals, Values and Ethics on the American people since the vast super-majority of the population is unable to do it for themselves.

Neither of these things are small-government conservatism anyway.

I'm an Authoritarian. That's not necessarily a "small government" type of Conservatism.

Hogwash, you've argueing a maded up, non-valid point. Doctors are not asking the children......

Go to Saudia Arabia if you want to live under a Morality Police State.

Moralizing statist simply amaze me.

 

[Anachronism]

What the hell? Where in the article is that? Do you allow you child to be examined by the doctor alone?

"Florida could become the first state to limit pediatricians' ability to ask parents whether they own a gun"

"Florida is set to become the first state to pass a law that would limit doctors' ability to council parents about gun safety in the home"

There is apparently a part of a child's physical these days where the parent is asked to leave so the "Good Doctor" can ask the child a number of questions without Mommy or Daddy there.. "Have you ever been touched inappropriately?" and the like. I do know of doctors that have been asking children about their parents smoking, drinking, drug use, and gun ownership during that time as well.

My doctor KNOWS I'm a gun owner. He doesn't like it. In fact he tried to bar me from indoor shooting ranges a couple years ago because of the lead level in my blood. I told him where he could take his advice and stick it.

Hogwash, you've argueing a maded up, non-valid point. Doctors are not asking the children......

Go to Saudia Arabia if you want to live under a Morality Police State.

Moralizing statist simply amaze me.

If Saudi Arabia allowed gun ownership I'd have been there a week after my 18th birthday, Boo. If you individuals could actually live by any level of morality or decency without government involvement it wouldn't be an issue. However, since you CAN'T the government has to get involved.