# It's starting!!!!!!!!



## berettabone (Jan 23, 2012)

I was listening to a local radio show, and a woman was explaining, that she went to see her family physician, along with her two small children. The physician was asking the usual health questions, and then he asked if they had any firearms in their home. She told him, that if he could give her a legitimate reason why he needed to know, she would be happy to answer, otherwise, it was none of his business or the gov't's. He proceeded with the gov't blah,blah, blah. Then he said that he and his nurse would like to speak with her children, without her presence. She proceeded to tell him that it was illegal for an attorney to speak to her children without an adult present, it was illegal for LE to talk to her children without an adult present, so why would she allow him to speak to her children without an adult present. She then asked if he was going to treat her family. Eventually, he gave them treatment. Before she left, she told him, that if she comes back again, and he asks that question again, she will go to the hospital, and be treated in the emergency room, since she has good insurance......and then start looking for another physician. She also told him to be prepared to lose patients, and to keep his attorney handy, along with his wallet. I would have told him the same thing, albeit, not as politely.:smt076


----------



## MuteTurkey (Nov 27, 2012)

Oh my.


----------



## JMessmer (Dec 30, 2012)

Oh god why...


----------



## guardrail (May 23, 2010)

The sky is falling!!!

Just tell them none of your business or no... end of story. It doesn't have to be that dramatic.


----------



## 95chevy (Nov 3, 2012)

A teacher in school has asked my sons class already. I informed him long ago to say no we have no guns in our home. Nobody needs to know that other than my family. Certainly teachers (or doctors) have any business knowing that.


----------



## Oklahoma92fs (Jan 25, 2013)

Just say “home is where the heart is and my heart is here with you so no”


----------



## berettabone (Jan 23, 2012)

Veterans should be especially concerned, if you get your medical care through the VA. They have all of your records, the gov't knows everything about you. If it is deemed by whomever, that a medication that you are prescribed is not " compatible with firearm ownership" guess who's going to come knocking for your firearms. It's happening already.


----------



## paratrooper (Feb 1, 2012)

I'm a vet and I'd be really hard pressed to go to a VA for any medical care.


----------



## berettabone (Jan 23, 2012)

You're lucky, some have no choice...and thanks for your service.


paratrooper said:


> I'm a vet and I'd be really hard pressed to go to a VA for any medical care.


----------



## paratrooper (Feb 1, 2012)

To be perfectly fair, I've heard both good and bad experiences with the VA system. But, in my case, I have good health care insurance and can pretty much go where I want when the need arises.


----------



## rex (Jan 27, 2012)

This has happened for about 2 years or so in a few places,and it was ceased here.From what I undersrand this is now going to be the norm through Osama Care and I don't doubt it.It'll be a while before it gets shot down too,if it's taken to court.


----------



## jakeleinen1 (Jul 20, 2011)

jesus...


----------



## paratrooper (Feb 1, 2012)

The last time I went to the ER, the nurse was asking me some questions.

One of the questions was, Do you feel safe in your own home? 

I responded, You mean compared to someone else's? 

She just looked at me and said, I'll take that as a yes.


----------



## momtotwo (Jan 22, 2013)

I guess I am lucky to be in the South. Around here, my doctors buy guns from our shop.

Many of them hunt and fish. The girl who cuts my boys hair, her son and husband have probably killed more deer than I have even seen in my life.

They don't ask us stuff like that around here.


----------



## suchablond1 (Jan 27, 2013)

paratrooper said:


> The last time I went to the ER, the nurse was asking me some questions.
> 
> One of the questions was, Do you feel safe in your own home?
> 
> ...


Took my husband to the ER this am to get stitches. They asked him that and I laughed. (I just got my Glock 21 this week) I understand they ask to identify signs of abuse but I couldn't help but find it funny since I'm the one who has all the fire arms. If he doesn't feel safe in our home it's his own fault.

regarding the OP...that's crazy they asked that, and I feel it's none of their business.


----------



## swfan (Jan 18, 2013)

guardrail said:


> The sky is falling!!!
> 
> Just tell them none of your business or no... end of story. It doesn't have to be that dramatic.


i completely agree why all the drama, Im a doctor I have a gun
what's the big deal. Just say no or say yes who cares


----------



## berettabone (Jan 23, 2012)

Then, why ask....QUOTE=swfan;282101]i completely agree why all the drama, Im a doctor I have a gun
what's the big deal. Just say no or say yes who cares[/QUOTE]


----------



## rdstrain49 (Dec 13, 2012)

Is it possible that there were mental health issues involved?



berettabone said:


> I was listening to a local radio show, and a woman was explaining, that she went to see her family physician, along with her two small children. The physician was asking the usual health questions, and then he asked if they had any firearms in their home. She told him, that if he could give her a legitimate reason why he needed to know, she would be happy to answer, otherwise, it was none of his business or the gov't's. He proceeded with the gov't blah,blah, blah. Then he said that he and his nurse would like to speak with her children, without her presence. She proceeded to tell him that it was illegal for an attorney to speak to her children without an adult present, it was illegal for LE to talk to her children without an adult present, so why would she allow him to speak to her children without an adult present. She then asked if he was going to treat her family. Eventually, he gave them treatment. Before she left, she told him, that if she comes back again, and he asks that question again, she will go to the hospital, and be treated in the emergency room, since she has good insurance......and then start looking for another physician. She also told him to be prepared to lose patients, and to keep his attorney handy, along with his wallet. I would have told him the same thing, albeit, not as politely.:smt076


----------



## usmcj (Sep 23, 2011)

berettabone said:


> Veterans should be especially concerned, if you get your medical care through the VA. They have all of your records, the gov't knows everything about you. If it is deemed by whomever, that a medication that you are prescribed is not " compatible with firearm ownership" guess who's going to come knocking for your firearms. It's happening already.


I disagree.

HR-2640 Section 3. (c)(1) IN GENERAL- No department or agency of the Federal Government may provide to the Attorney General any record of an adjudication related to the mental health of a person or any commitment of a person to a mental institution if--

(A) the adjudication or commitment, respectively, has been set aside or expunged, or the person has otherwise been fully released or discharged from all mandatory treatment, supervision, or monitoring;

(B) the person has been found by a court, board, commission, or other lawful authority to no longer suffer from the mental health condition that was the basis of the adjudication or commitment, respectively, or has otherwise been found to be rehabilitated through any procedure available under law; or

(*C) the adjudication or commitment, respectively, is based solely on a medical finding of disability, without an opportunity for a hearing by a court, board, commission, or other lawful authority, and the person has not been adjudicated as a mental defective consistent with section 922(g)(4) of title 18, United States Code,* except that nothing in this section or any other provision of law shall prevent a Federal department or agency from providing to the Attorney General any record demonstrating that a person was adjudicated to be not guilty by reason of insanity, or based on lack of mental responsibility, or found incompetent to stand trial, in any criminal case or under the Uniform Code of Military Justice.

So the VA makes mistakes. That's correct, the VA is staffed by people and people have been known to make mistakes. Remind me which medical facility it is that makes no mistakes. Generalizations upset folks? How about the gun owner that goes off and shoots someone, or several someones? Does that make all gun owners like him? Of course not. If a football coach is accused of molesting students, does that suspicion now blanket all football coaches? No. So VA medical care shouldn't be foisted on our worst enemies? Grow up, and quit your whinin'. The VA "fee bases" many Veterans to other providers if the VA can't provide the needed services. If you're service-connected at 30% or more, the VA will pay for your travel expenses. Contrary to the beliefs of some, the VA cannot magically produce all the equipment that they would like to have.

I worked for the VA for a number of years, both providing medical care, and later on the administrative side of things. 98% of VA employees are very conscientious, and care about our Veterans. The remaining 2% of employees whose performance is not exemplary, exist in all service-oriented occupations. To impune ALL VA employees, and the VA system due to the actions of a few, is juvenile, immature, and reeks of a child's hissy fit. Here we go... a VA doc in California misses a diagnosis.... so ALL VA doctors are now guilty of malpractice? Yeah, right. How about the quadriplegics who are now walking and holding their children, thanks to VA doctors? Does that make all VA doctors miracle-workers? Nope, it doesn't work that way either.

Here's something that most Veterans don't know.... several years ago, the VA (at the govt's orders) instituted a program called "Cultural Transformation", or the process by which in-patient Veterans should be made to feel as much as possible, like they were at home. Bottom line.... Staff couldn't make the Veterans eat, abide by a clinically required diet, (diabetes) take their meds, go to therapy, get out of bed, take a shower, (even if visitors or family complained) or even wear clothes..... neat huh? Even more so was the fact that given all these rights of refusal, we, the staff, were still tasked with providing beneficial care to those patients. Pssst... we got it done, too...

If you're a Veteran, thank you for your service. If you're using the VA Health Care System ONLY because you served, you earned it. If you're using the VA Health Care System because you're service-connected, then you earned it to a greater degree.... and that's as it should be. If you feel that the VA is less competent than other health care institutions, you're wrong. The VA, being a government entity, attracts lawsuits and whiners, and posers, because they feel that the government connection equals deep pockets. You're wrong there too.



> How does the VA measure up against other U.S. health care providers? To address this question, RAND researchers compared the medical records of VA patients with a national sample and evaluated how effectively health care is delivered to each group. Their findings:
> 
> 
> VA patients received about two-thirds of the care recommended by national standards, compared with about half in the national sample.
> ...


VA quality of care comparison

Everyone thinks their issues are paramount. While not always true in the real world, it's quite common. As I said in another post, if you're so distressed over your VA health care, then either go elsewhere for your medical care, or bitch at the folks who can make a difference... your elected officials. You don't have to fill out any forms, give any reasons, cry on anyone's shoulders, or buy stock in Kleenex, just go away. Or, better yet, find a medical facility that never makes errors and get treated there.


----------



## berettabone (Jan 23, 2012)

I don't know what any of this has to do with my original post. My original post had nothing to do with the care, staff, standards, physicians, or anything else within the VA. All of the info you posted is nice, but I personally know of two veterans, who have had their firearms taken from them. If you're a reasonably intelligent person, you must realize, that in this day and age....there is no such thing as privacy. I am sure that the VA does a wonderful job...has nothing to do with my original post. It had everything to do, with the physician asking the questions about firearms in the first place. I've seen many " just say no" and move on......then why ask the question in the first place, if it's no big deal. If it's no big deal, then I won't answer.


----------



## usmcj (Sep 23, 2011)

> I don't know what any of this has to do with my original post. My original post had nothing to do with the care, staff, standards, physicians, or anything else within the VA




Your original post directly addressed the VA.








Originally Posted by *berettabone* 
_Veterans should be especially concerned, if you get your medical care through the VA.

_


> It had everything to do, with the physician asking the questions about firearms in the first place


VA docs don't ask about firearms unless another screening question leads to that. I've been a VA patient for many years,. and have never been asked about firearms.


----------



## thndrchiken (Oct 10, 2011)

I live with my elderly handicapped parents as their caregiver, my father is going through the VA for his cancer treatment. I made sure to tell him that if these questions come up that the only response he is to give is a resounding no.


----------



## berettabone (Jan 23, 2012)

Actually, my first post makes absolutely no mention of the VA whatsoever........My second post does........If you have never been asked, good for you, but many have and are.


usmcj said:


> Your original post directly addressed the VA.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## usmcj (Sep 23, 2011)

Your second post. I stand corrected.

There are no set of questions regarding firearms, asked to Veterans as a whole, unless a routine mental health screen, generates concerns of suicidal ideation. or seeking to do harm to others. *Even after a suicide, or mental health risk was identified*, in less than 6% of Veterans identified with suicidal ideation, was access to firearms recommended to be restricted. That recommendation is subject to adjudication.

The PHQ-9 screen for depression and mental health triggers is located at this link. Note that firearms are NOT mentioned. The PHQ-9 screen was referenced in this study.

PHQ-9





> Within the group of 230 primary care patients who had positive SI assessments, 214 (93%) had providers who documented specific acknowledgement of the positive assessments. For a majority (>65%), clinicians documented exploration for risk factors including hopelessness, past suicide attempts, psychiatric (including substance use) disorders, and pain, as well as relationship and occupational problems. A medication initiation or change was noted for 58% of patients, and mental health follow-up was arranged for 93%. Clinicians documented inquiries about firearms for only 23% of the patients, and recommendations to restrict access to firearms for 6%.


HSR&D Study: DHI 08-096

Quite often, stories abound that allude to Veterans being stripped of their gun rights because they have PTSD, or because their doc found out they had firearms. Not that simple .... never has been. Get ALL the facts, not just hearsay. After all, it is the internet.

Y'all have a nice day. :smt1099


----------



## berettabone (Jan 23, 2012)

So what I stated is happening, IS happening....I rest my case.


usmcj said:


> Your second post. I stand corrected.
> 
> There are no set of questions regarding firearms, asked to Veterans as a whole, unless a routine mental health screen, generates concerns of suicidal ideation. or seeking to do harm to others. *Even after a suicide, or mental health risk was identified*, in less than 6% of Veterans identified with suicidal ideation, was access to firearms recommended to be restricted. That recommendation is subject to adjudication.
> 
> ...


----------



## usmcj (Sep 23, 2011)

berettabone said:


> So what I stated is happening, IS happening....I rest my case.


Only in a specific set of circumstances, and not with just any or every Veteran, and NOT as a general matter of course. In which link did you find any question related to fireams? Are you insinuating that EVERY Veteran has PTSD? I hope not.. or that PTSD is viewed by the VA as grounds to prevent access to firearms? That isn't true either.


----------



## berettabone (Jan 23, 2012)

It seems that specific circumstances are happening more and more lately, which usually are the result of one person's opinion. Now, you're putting words in my mouth. I am not insinuating anything. I am stating facts, of which I have some personal observance to.....you can argue till the sun shines, and put words in other's mouths if you wish. All any physician has to do, is raise a red flag...that's all it takes, period.


usmcj said:


> Only in a specific set of circumstances, and not with just any or every Veteran, and NOT as a general matter of course. In which link did you find any question related to fireams? Are you insinuating that EVERY Veteran has PTSD? I hope not.. or that PTSD is viewed by the VA as grounds to prevent access to firearms? That isn't true either.


----------



## usmcj (Sep 23, 2011)

See post 19...again....

* No department or agency of the Federal Government may provide to the Attorney General any record of an adjudication related to the mental health of a person or any commitment of a person to a mental institution if--*

(*C) the adjudication or commitment, respectively, is based solely on a medical finding of disability, without an opportunity for a hearing by a court, board, commission, or other lawful authority*

HR-2640 Section 3. (c)(1) IN GENERAL- No department or agency of the Federal Government may provide to the Attorney General any record of an adjudication related to the mental health of a person or any commitment of a person to a mental institution if--

(A) the adjudication or commitment, respectively, has been set aside or expunged, or the person has otherwise been fully released or discharged from all mandatory treatment, supervision, or monitoring;

(B) the person has been found by a court, board, commission, or other lawful authority to no longer suffer from the mental health condition that was the basis of the adjudication or commitment, respectively, or has otherwise been found to be rehabilitated through any procedure available under law; or

(*C) the adjudication or commitment, respectively, is based solely on a medical finding of disability, without an opportunity for a hearing by a court, board, commission, or other lawful authority, and the person has not been adjudicated as a mental defective consistent with section 922(g)(4) of title 18, United States Code, except that nothing in this section or any other provision of law shall prevent a Federal department or agency from providing to the Attorney General any record demonstrating that a person was adjudicated to be not guilty by reason of insanity, or based on lack of mental responsibility, or found incompetent to stand trial, in any criminal case or under the Uniform Code of Military Justice.*


----------



## berettabone (Jan 23, 2012)

Yeah, I've seen all that, again.............


----------



## usmcj (Sep 23, 2011)

And, yet you see only what you want to see.



> If it is deemed by whomever, that a medication that you are prescribed is not " compatible with firearm ownership" guess who's going to come knocking for your firearms. It's happening already.


Can you cite a case where firearms were taken ONLY on the basis of a prescription?.... or a case where firearms were taken ONLY as the result of one physician's statement?


----------



## berettabone (Jan 23, 2012)

What I do, is go by personal observations......I don't need to site anything.....it's like when the gov't comes out with unemployment numbers...then you ask them...did they take into account, the people who have just given up...well, no.........you can serve up all the numbers and statistics that you want...we all know, that 10 people studying the same problem, will come up with 10 different conclusions, and 10 different numbers......I have a VA hospital within 2 miles of me, and they have had their issues for years, well documented in my area....you seem to think, that everyone abides by every rule, every law, every set of procedures, every moral compass.........I'll end this conversation with......I have some really nice dry land I can sell you, it's by the Everglades, but it's really dry, honest.........and it's cheap. Your wrong in the fact that I see alot of things that I don't want to see.


----------



## usmcj (Sep 23, 2011)

> I have some really nice dry land I can sell you, it's by the Everglades, but it's really dry, honest.........and it's cheap



... and the ethics of physicians is called into question....? Wow.... :smt1099


----------



## thndrchiken (Oct 10, 2011)

usmcj said:


> ... and the ethics of physicians is called into question....? Wow.... :smt1099


Well if our imposter and chief can do it.... "taking little Jimmy's tonsils or cutting off a diabetics toes or ordering an unneeded surgical procedure for profit"


----------



## SMann (Dec 11, 2008)

swfan said:


> i completely agree why all the drama, Im a doctor I have a gun
> what's the big deal. Just say no or say yes who cares


When all health records are kept in a federally maintained database it may turn into a big deal. "Oh, you took ADD medication as a kid? I'm sorry, new regulations say you can't own firearms." You have to be able to see past the end of your nose.


----------



## berettabone (Jan 23, 2012)

Exactly............lot's of long noses......


SMann said:


> When all health records are kept in a federally maintained database it may turn into a big deal. "Oh, you took ADD medication as a kid? I'm sorry, new regulations say you can't own firearms." You have to be able to see past the end of your nose.


----------



## swfan (Jan 18, 2013)

from a physician standpoint that doc was being a weirdo
there is no law or medical rule saying owning a handgun has anything to do with your health
yes i have read about studies linking owning handguns to increasing the risk of an unintentional discharge and someone getting hurt. kind of like smoking increases your risk of cancer doesnt mean it will happen.
so to be clear it was just that doc there is no conspiracy or rule by the medical establishment to log who owns a gun and theres no tracking at this time and i don't ask my patients this question nor was I ever told or taught to do so. frankly i have more pressing questions to ask during my 15 min office visit

now i will tell you about a real medical conspiracy as an insider sorry for going off topic but come 2014 good luck trying to see your doc because the health care reform act kicks in saying everyone is required by law to have health insurance which sure doesnt affect you except you forgot that 30 million people that were not insured now suddenly are by the govt and so talk about wait times to see your doc...socialized medicine ppl


----------



## SMann (Dec 11, 2008)

swfan, that question is now standard in some places. Inform yourself please. What happens in your county and state isn't necessarily what happens in the rest of the country.


----------



## blake38 (Apr 18, 2013)

berettabone said:


> I was listening to a local radio show, and a woman was explaining, that she went to see her family physician, along with her two small children. The physician was asking the usual health questions, and then he asked if they had any firearms in their home. She told him, that if he could give her a legitimate reason why he needed to know, she would be happy to answer, otherwise, it was none of his business or the gov't's. He proceeded with the gov't blah,blah, blah. Then he said that he and his nurse would like to speak with her children, without her presence. She proceeded to tell him that it was illegal for an attorney to speak to her children without an adult present, it was illegal for LE to talk to her children without an adult present, so why would she allow him to speak to her children without an adult present. She then asked if he was going to treat her family. Eventually, he gave them treatment. Before she left, she told him, that if she comes back again, and he asks that question again, she will go to the hospital, and be treated in the emergency room, since she has good insurance......and then start looking for another physician. She also told him to be prepared to lose patients, and to keep his attorney handy, along with his wallet. I would have told him the same thing, albeit, not as politely.:smt076


I find this whole anecdote kind of implausible. Especially the part about "He proceeded with the gov't blah,blah, blah." In my experience, the number of explanation points in a subject line is inversely proportional to how serious the post should be taken.

Just my two cents!!!!!!!!!!!!


----------

