It is not horribly unfair.  Certification bodies in medicine try to
rate hosipitals/physicians etc by a bunch of quality measures and see
how much the doctors etc are complying with these...


Perhaps arbitrary, but, in the umbrella of lifestyle coaching for
safety, certain large hospitals in LA ask every patient "do you use
seatbelts" and then coach them to wear seatbelts if they do not.  It
is an easy metric by which one can see "improvement" of doctoring.


In a country where 1/2 the people have guns, asking "Do you own
firearms" is okish if it is a lead in to "and do you store them
properly."

Also for many diseases, the disease or treatment might mean that
counseling for "and have you considered a custodian for your firearms
during this time" is reasonable.  There are many age related illnesses
for which this is very important.


On the other hand, generically leading into "and have you thought
about getting rid of them for safety" is not great. Nor is a arbitrary
invasion into privacy.


Honestly, I have a hard time gauging the intent of the President's
point other than:
   -physician learns of a possible risk
   -physician trys now to make an assessment of the mental health of the patient
This seems the intended purpose and it also seems a bit of a witch hunt.




On Fri, Jan 18, 2013 at 4:12 PM, Phil Lee <[email protected]> wrote:
> President Obama suggested the other day as part of his "gun safety"
> initiative that it was appropriate for physicians to ask about their
> patients' guns.
>
> Doctors who advise outside of their area of expertise have committed a
> professional boundary violation.
>
> The link:
> www.ethics.va.gov/docs/necrpts/NEC_Report_20030701_Ethical_Boundaries_Pt-Clinician_Relationship.pdf
> , "Ethical Boundaries in the Patient-Clinician Relationship," National
> Center for Ethics in Health Care, July 2003,
> defines "for physicians: Professionalism is the basis of medicine’s contract
> with society. It demands placing the interests of patients above those of
> the physician, setting and maintaining standards of competence and
> integrity, and providing expert advice to society on matters of health."
>
> So, if a physician asks about guns in the home of a patient, it may be
> argued that question has little to do with the patient's health unless he
> observes a condition such as mental disturbance that justifies such a
> question for a particular patient. Even if there were a circumstance with a
> patient justifying the question, doctors advising on guns may be questioned
> about their training ("standards of competence") to do so. It is rare that a
> physician has been medically certified to advise about gun safety and rarer
> still that a physician studies the perils a patient may face (i.e. crime in
> his neighborhood). Unless a physician undertakes a study leading to his
> certification and unless he studied the patients unique circumstances, in
> advising he would not have limited himself as a professional should do.
> According to the linked document "A boundary violation occurs when a health
> care professional’s behavior goes beyond appropriate professional limits."
>
> Phil
>
> _______________________________________________
> To post, send message to [email protected]
> To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see
> http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/firearmsregprof
>
> Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be viewed as
> private.  Anyone can subscribe to the list and read messages that are
> posted; people can read the Web archives; and list members can (rightly or
> wrongly) forward the messages to others.
_______________________________________________
To post, send message to [email protected]
To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see 
http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/firearmsregprof

Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be viewed as private.  
Anyone can subscribe to the list and read messages that are posted; people can 
read the Web archives; and list members can (rightly or wrongly) forward the 
messages to others.

Reply via email to