PsychiatricTimes Members: Login | Register

|     

PsychiatricTimes SearchMedica Medline Drugs

Powered by SearchMedica

 
Risk Assessment
News
Current Issues
Blogs
Special Reports
CME
Conferences
Resources
Careers
Multimedia
About Us
 

Home » Blogs » Couch in Crisis

Psychiatric Times.
 

The NRA versus The Doctors: A Psychiatrist’s Take On an Explosive Issue

By Susan Kweskin | April 5, 2011

Had the National Rifle Association had its way and Bill 432 had been voted into law in Florida, physicians would have been prohibited from asking their patients whether they have access to firearms.1 That bill, the details of which can be read here--ww.flsenate.gov/Session/Bill/2011/0432/BillText/Filed/HTML--would have made it a felony to ask about access to guns or even to include details about such access in a patient’s medical record. Perpetrators would have been imprisoned for up to 5 years and/or fined $5 million.

According to Psychiatric News, the NRA introduced Bill 432 into the Florida House and Senate in an effort to “prevent intrusion” into the constitutional right to bear arms.2

An article in the March 29, 2011 Sunshine News reports that an apparent compromise has now been reached between the backers of the bill and the Florida Medical Association, which strongly opposed it. Under that compromise, questions about gun ownership would generally be permissible—as long as the physician doesn’t “harass” the patient and doesn’t include information about guns into the medical record without "good reason." According to that article, both the Florida Medical Association and the NRA now support the measure.

The NRA appears to be maneuvering similar bills in other states, so the issue may become one of national importance. It is a legislative battle that could affect all physicians—-but it has serious forensic and liability implications for psychiatrists in particular.

Psychiatric Times editor emeritus, Ronald Pies, MD, offers these thoughts on this issue. Dr Pies is professor of psychiatry at SUNY Upstate Medical University, Syracuse NY; and Tufts University School of Medicine in Boston.

“It is the physician's moral, legal, and clinical responsibility to inquire into all relevant risk factors related to a patient's safety, both with respect to self-harm and potential harm to others. The possession of firearms in the home—legal or otherwise—markedly increases the risk of both gun-related suicide and homicide, as well as unintentional gun-related harm to others.

The constitutionality of legal possession of firearms is emphatically not the issue here. The issue is the physician’s professional right and duty to inquire into risk factors for harm to self or others, including but not limited to possession of firearms. Indeed, failure to so inquire—particularly in cases involving suicidal or homicidal individuals seen in emergency room settings—would pose a serious threat to the safety and well-being of both the patient and, potentially, society. It would also expose the physician to tremendous liability in the event a patient with violent tendencies left the medical setting and inflicted harm upon him/herself or others.

No law that has a chilling effect on pertinent medical assessment of risk factors for violence should be tolerated by any state or any citizen. I would urge all legislators to ensure that any law written to protect the privacy of patients includes language stating that, ‘Nothing in this legislation shall be construed as restricting a physician’s right and duty to carry out a thorough and professional assessment of the patient's safety vis-a-vis self and others. No liability shall be attached to a physician's inquiries re: firearms possession, when such inquiry occurs in the course of the professional medical assessment of a patient's safety.’”
 

 

Join the Conversation

Want to join the conversation? If you're a healthcare professional, we'd like to hear your comments. Just sign in or register today to become part of our growing, online community.

  • Oldest First
  • Newest First

by Corey Yilmaz | May 14, 2011 2:18 AM EDT

People in the USA are IRRATIONALLYFEARFUL of the governments possibly taking away their guns- I have heard really intelligent people express this fear- that will never happen. What also will never happen- is people rising up in arms against their goverment- can you imagine some handguns against a B-2 Stealth bomber?
There are about 33 SUICIDES for every DEFENSE of one's home using a gun, thats 33:1. Therefore I assume that people IRRATIONALLY overestimate their chances of protecting their home with a gun- SUICIDE is a RARE event, protecting ones home against an intruder with a gun is EVEN RARER...
So if you want to have your gun, then great, but dont be surprised when your friend who you didnt think anthing was wrong with- kills himself with a gun- or when a mentally ill individual buys a gun without a hitch and goes on a rampage. Its the price of our irrationaly fears...

by michael ganz | May 12, 2011 4:23 PM EDT

Risk for violence is well known and accepted as not increased by virtue of "mental illness"not otherwise defined and without individual history being considered.
Dr. Pies offers thoughts, i.e opinions, only, of one psychiatrist, with absence of critical thought.
Should other "risks' be the concerns of the physician? Would you remove a depressed patient from upper stories of a house, bodies of water, belts, electrical outlets, etc.
In a crime ridden neighborhood should a homeowner with any diagnosis, the symptoms of which are controlled by medication and followed by a physician, be seen as so impaired as to be at the level of risk Dr. Pies suggests, and therefore be ordered to give up his right to self defense?
Spare us the well meaning but illogical social engineers.

by William Sauve | May 12, 2011 11:25 AM EDT

Edward Teach, well said!!

Furthermore - these questions of "free speech"and privacy rights of patients, right to own weapons (and to be left alone about it ...) all are pertinent only because the patient-physician relationship has already been inappropriately invaded. Such questions would be rendered meaningless if patients believed they had a choice of which doctor they see, and if physicians and patients didn't live in constant fear of what the "grownups" (meaning, insurance companies and the government) might do if such information was documented in the record - instead, some patients who value privacy above safety would likely restrict their business to doctors who don't ask so many questions - other patients would likely place great value on physicians who tended to be very intrusive, interpreting such invasiveness as "really caring."

And of course everything in between.

by Edward Teach | May 12, 2011 10:43 AM EDT

This is a misreading of the bill, and probably psychiatry.

First, the law reduces physician liability, not increases it. This is "information bias": assuming that knowing information is useful in itself, that it is the same as acting on information. Put bluntly: if you're not allowed to ask, it's not totally your fault; if you are allowed to ask, what are you going to do about it? Seriously, what? All you've done is noted on the chart at Visit 1 that he has a gun, and that you did nothing for the next 14 visits. This is exactly what happens at all those "well baby visits": pediatricians collect a gigantic amount of information, harp excessively on whatever happens to be their pointless favorite ("he has a prominent tongue thrust, you should have that evaluated") and ignore the rest, and give out amoxicillin as a form of parental valium.

Second, the science isn't on the side of the doctors:

"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)…. states with the most guns at home have suicide rates double rates of states with the fewest guns, and those suicides are often children.."

and I do not doubt it; but is there any reduction in gun deaths because doctors get to ask this on their routine screens?

Third: getting an answer to the question is not the same as knowing the true answer to the question. If he says no, then what? Phew? (Asking this question didn't prevent a patient from pulling a gun on me.) The clinical interview fails where it is most important; patients are accidentally/deliberately unreliable, and doctors use the information to excuse themselves. Docs would do well to adopt the old adage of the Navy Seals that I just made up: always assume the other guy is armed. And HIV+. And a lawyer. And etc.

Fourth, the intent of the bill is explicitly to prevent discrimination against gun owners from insurers and doctors. If you're worried that your HIV status will adversely affect your employment, imagine what "owns two 9mms"will do.

One might ask what value there is in a five minute lecture about gun safety given to a long time gun owner by a doctor whose entire knowledge of guns comes from Hardcastle & McCormick, especially when the whole visit is 7 minutes.

One might also be tempted to ask about any racial bias: do doctors routinely ask minority patients about guns? If they do, how strongly does the doctor push them on it? (Or does he write with great relief: "patient denied guns.")

Those outraged by the new law also seem to think that it is a free speech issue: "since when is the government allowed to tell me what I can or cannot talk to my patients about?"

And in this single aspect, they are absolutely correct and simultaneously completely oblivious: medicine is no longer a private matter. Medicine turned its gaze to society and became an arm of social policy, at the service of the government. Time to bone up on our Foucault.

The Last Psychiatrist
http://thelastpsychiatrist.com

by Ronald Pies | April 26, 2011 11:15 PM EDT

I very much appreciate the astute points made by Susan Ward and Eric Dickhaus. We need more of such advocacy!--Best regards, Ron Pies MD

Article Comment Pages: 1 2 3 Previous Next






References:
1. Doctors go to jail for asking patients about guns in the home. http://psychiatrist-blog.blogspot.com/2011/03/doctors-to-go-to-jail-for-asking.html. Accessed April 1, 2011.
2. Guldin B. Bill would put silencer on gun talk between doctors, patients. Psychiatric News. March 4, 2011. http://pn.psychiatryonline.org/content/46/5/16.3.full. Accessed April 1, 2011.
3. Pies R. Psychiatrists should be advocates for gun control laws. Psychiatric News. 2011; 46:6
http://pn.psychiatryonline.org/content/46/7/6.1.full?sid=65a8cf78-d29b-494a-9c50-2e69b020d47a. Accessed April 1, 2011.


 
TOPIC INDEX

Addiction Medicine
Alzheimer Disease
Anxiety Disorders
ADHD
Bipolar Disorder
Child & Adolescent Psychiatry
Dementia
Depression
DSM-5
Geriatric Psychiatry

 

Health Care Reform
Major Depressive
Disorder
OCD
Personality Disorders
Schizoaffective Disorder
Schizophrenia
Sleep Disorders
Somatoform Disorders
All Topics

 


 
FROM PHYSICIANS PRACTICE
Five Steps to Improving Patient Access
Judy Capko,  May 21, 2013
Patient access is getting increased attention through reform initiatives. Here are five steps you can take to make sure patients get appropriate access to care in your office.
Growing HIPAA Threat – Ignore Windows XP at Your Own Peril
Marion K. Jenkins,  May 21, 2013
Chances are good that you have some major ticking software time bombs lurking in your medical practice's computer environment, namely Windows XP and Server 2003.
Finding Physician Work-Life Balance in the Small Moments
Jennifer Frank, MD,  May 21, 2013
At my practice and at home, things are always busy. There's laundry or homework, or a patient with needs.
Three Areas to Reduce Costs at Your Medical Practice
Greg Mertz,  May 19, 2013
By taking a hard look at reducing costs for staffing, overhead, and technology at your medical practice, you may see increased physician compensation.
Dos and Don’ts for Starting a Physician Blog
Michael Woo-Ming, MD,  May 18, 2013
Starting a physician blog can provide your medical practice with marketing benefits, but it's important to do it right.
 

 

 
MOST POPULAR
  • Most Popular
  • Most Emailed
  • Most Recent
  • The Moral Struggles of Practicing Psychiatrists
  • Developmental Psychopathology Comes of Age
  • Grief and Depression: The Sages Knew the Difference
  • Update on Mental Health Benefits and Substance Use Disorder Services Under the Affordable Care Act
  • Experts Discuss Changes, Updates in DSM-5
  • Successful Aging: Strategies to Help Maintain and Nurture a Healthy Brain
  • You Are—And Your Mood Is—What You Eat
  • Grief and Depression: The Sages Knew the Difference
  • Experts Discuss Changes, Updates in DSM-5
  • Developmental Psychopathology Comes of Age
  • The Psychiatrist and the Slot Machine
  • The Role of Biological Tests in Psychiatric Diagnosis
  • You Are—And Your Mood Is—What You Eat
  • Experts Discuss Changes, Updates in DSM-5
  • The Paradox of Choice: When More Medications Mean Less Treatment
Click here to subscribe to our newsletter
 
COMMENTS
  • Most Commented
  • Most Recent
  • Grief and Depression: The Sages Knew the Difference
  • Psychiatry and the Myth of “Medicalization”
  • Is it Time for a Treatment Manual to Complement DSM-5?
  • NIMH vs DSM 5: No One Wins, Patients Lose
  • DSM-5 Won’t Solve the Overdiagnosis Problem—But Clinicians Can
  • Experts Discuss Changes, Updates in DSM-5
  • The Role of Biological Tests in Psychiatric Diagnosis
  • Successful Aging: Strategies to Help Maintain and Nurture a Healthy Brain
  • Refinements in ECT Techniques
  • DSM-5 Won’t Solve the Overdiagnosis Problem—But Clinicians Can
Click here to subscribe to our newsletter


 
CAREER CENTER

  •   Featured Jobs  
  •    Resources   
  • Psychiatry and Nurse Practitioner Opportunities
  • Associate Medical Director - Psychiatrist Delray Beach, Florida
  • Retiring Child Psychiatrist Seeks Replacement August 2010 or Before
  • Chairperson, Dept of Psychiatry Needed
  • FT Staff Psychiatrist - Excellent Benefits
  • BC Adult and Child Psychiatrits - PT and FT Positions Available
  • Managing Risks When Practicing in Three-Party Care Settings
  • 12 Tips for Making Your Practice Greener
  • Keys to Avoiding Malpractice: Standard of Care in Psychiatric Practice
  • Take This Job and Shove It
  • Merging Administrative and Academic Careers in Psychiatry


CancerNetwork | ConsultantLive | Diagnostic Imaging | Musculoskeletal Network | OBGYN.net | PediatricsConsultantLive |
Physicians Practice | Psychiatric Times | SearchMedica | Medical Resources

© 1996 - 2013 UBM Medica LLC, a UBM company
Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Advertising Information - Editorial Policy Statement - UBM Medica Network Privacy Policy