Florida Bill , Doctors On Gun Safety

[Timothy]

A private doctor, taking patients due to what health plans they may belong too, does so by contract.  If he/she refused me because of a biased decision on a subject that is NONE OF THEIR BUSINESS, then there will be a problem.  I would contact my provider and explain the situation immediately and ask that I be allowed to see a physician outside my plan network.  That would prompt some sort of action, I hope!

A doctor needs to know nothing of my personal business buy my health issue and any family background that may be germane to the treatment he may prescribe.

[fightingquaker13]

A private doctor, taking patients due to what health plans they may belong too, does so by contract.  If he/she refused me because of a biased decision on a subject that is NONE OF THEIR BUSINESS, then there will be a problem.  I would contact my provider and explain the situation immediately and ask that I be allowed to see a physician outside my plan network.  That would prompt some sort of action, I hope!

A doctor needs to know nothing of my personal business buy my health issue and any family background that may be germane to the treatment he may prescribe.

Agreed. The germain question is this. Should the government set up a list of prescribed and proscribed questions?
FQ13 who thinks the answer is no.

[Timothy]

We've all heard of cases where doctors feel that THEY know better than the patient, or parent, or guardian and use the courts to make judgements in their favor to remove patients or families rights in extreme cases.  IMO, doctors are the last people I want looking after my best interests.  I've lost respect for most, if not all after what's happened to me.

Leave me alone, leave my family alone and ask only what necessary to provide me with the care I need, PERIOD!

More laws mean nothing if they're ignored by those that they're meant to control....

[Pathfinder]

And you call me a "faux libertarian".

Because you continually demonstrate what you are.

Path
You are standing up a strawman and you know it. Race, gender, religion and in some (not all) states, sexual preference are protected classes. Those you cannot discriminate against. Likewise, there are generally exigent circumstance rules that forbid providers from denying urgent care and the like. Beyond that though, docs are free to say no. If they don't like Masons, left handers or republicans they can choose not to do business with you. You can do the same. You seem to fail to address my argument. I'm not saying they SHOULD ask you about guns. I am merely saying that there should NOT be a law that tells what they can (or must) ask. Your life, your body, your choice. Big brother has no place here. If the Doc is a PITA, go elsewhere, there is a whole yellow pages full of them.  Just don't expect the nanny state to write the script for your doctor's consultation. And you call me a "faux libertarian".
FQ13

Nope, not a strawman at all. They are "protected" because a law was passed protecting them. The US Constitution (which is supposed to supersede all US laws), and the ND Constitution (ditto within the state), both provide for the RIGHT to keep and bear arms. The doctor has no right to be asking about non-medical activities.

And you missed the part about this is a politically motivated action promulgated by the leftoids who have taken over the AMA and the pediatrician's so-called "professional" groups. So I am perfectly OK with FL passing a law saying in essence that doctors should stick to what they purport to know about medicine, and keep the hell out of other subjects. It just ain't the doctor's business. That is true libertarianism - stay the hell out of my personal business.

[fightingquaker13]

Correction. True Libertarianism is telling a doctor to mind his own business yourself. Faux Libertarianism is expecting the government to pass a law so you won't have to take the responsibility yourself.
FQ13

[Sponsor]

[JC5123]

Correction. True Libertarianism is telling a doctor to mind his own business yourself. Faux Libertarianism is expecting the government to pass a law so you won't have to take the responsibility yourself.
FQ13

That misses the point. That if the AMA wasn't pushing their own political agenda on their patients, we wouldn't need the legislature to intervene. Sorry FQ but owning a gun doesn't have ANY effect on my health, and is none of my doctors business. It would be no different than if he was refusing to treat me because I owned a speedboat.

You are trying to make the argument that this is about personal responsibility. That is where you are wrong. What you have is a situation where, someone is denying service to you based on your ownership of a product that they disagree with. AND have no reason to even be asking about.

You seem to think that it is easy to just go find another doctor. Have you tried it? With insurances being so picky as to who they will pay, and doctors being even worse about what insurances they will accept, it's not like just going across the street to a different grocery store. Add to that the fact there already are too few doctors to go around. Especially is smaller communities.

Sorry but this isn't an argument about personal responsibility, this is about invasion of privacy. 

[Solus]

That misses the point. That if the AMA wasn't pushing their own political agenda on their patients, we wouldn't need the legislature to intervene. Sorry FQ but owning a gun doesn't have ANY effect on my health, and is none of my doctors business. It would be no different than if he was refusing to treat me because I owned a speedboat.

You are trying to make the argument that this is about personal responsibility. That is where you are wrong. What you have is a situation where, someone is denying service to you based on your ownership of a product that they disagree with. AND have no reason to even be asking about.

You seem to think that it is easy to just go find another doctor. Have you tried it? With insurances being so picky as to who they will pay, and doctors being even worse about what insurances they will accept, it's not like just going across the street to a different grocery store. Add to that the fact there already are too few doctors to go around. Especially is smaller communities.

Sorry but this isn't an argument about personal responsibility, this is about invasion of privacy. 

You are under no obligation to tell the Dr. anything you don't want to.  Simply don't answer and there is no invasion.

If the check out person at your local grocery asked you if  you were a gun owner, you would tell them to mind their own business if you chose not to tell them.  You might also speak to the store manager about it, and if their answer was unsatisfactory, you would consider doing business someplace else.

I hope you wouldn't push for a law making it illegal for check out personal (or any other individual) to ask you about this subject.

[JC5123]

You are under no obligation to tell the Dr. anything you don't want to.  Simply don't answer and there is no invasion.

If the check out person at your local grocery asked you if  you were a gun owner, you would tell them to mind their own business if you chose not to tell them.  You might also speak to the store manager about it, and if their answer was unsatisfactory, you would consider doing business someplace else.

I hope you wouldn't push for a law making it illegal for check out personal (or any other individual) to ask you about this subject.

Last I checked no answer usually IS an answer.

The problem with that is that we are not talking about groceries that I can get at any of 20 different places. We are talking about being denied medical care based on the fact that the doctor doesn't agree with my decision to own firearms. It's no different than the fight we had a few years ago when pharmacists were denying medications to people based on their religious beliefs.

I don't see the need for legislation. This should be a common sense issue. But what these doctors are doing here is total B.S. And while I usually support doctors when it comes to litigation, this is one thing that would make me consider bringing suit. This is purely politically motivated.

[mkm]

Doctors have no right to ask about you and guns unless you shot yourself in the leg or he's your ear doctor wondering if you shoot without hearing protection (seems legit to me).

That being said, I'm not sure there should be a specific law either. 

Yall keep acting like there are only two answers to the doctor's question: Yes or go find another doctor.  It doesn't affect your health so say NO.  It isn't that hard.  I normally wouldn't advise lying especially to your doctor, but, why not in this case.

[JC5123]

Doctors have no right to ask about you and guns unless you shot yourself in the leg or he's your ear doctor wondering if you shoot without hearing protection (seems legit to me).

That being said, I'm not sure there should be a specific law either. 

Yall keep acting like there are only two answers to the doctor's question: Yes or go find another doctor.  It doesn't affect your health so say NO.  It isn't that hard.  I normally wouldn't advise lying especially to your doctor, but, why not in this case.

I fully agree with that reasoning behind questioning your use of guns. My point is that asking if you own guns as part of a political agenda, and then refusing treatment if you do not agree with their liberal doctrine SHOULD be considered discrimination on the same grounds as sexual orientation or race. The problem is that liberals cannot understand common sense and live and let live situations. The only thing that gets the point across to them that this is unacceptable is litigation, or legislation. I don't want to see them have to make a law about this, but that's the only was they will understand that we are serious about it.