Doctor's Advice on Guns?

[CoRoMo]

A nurse ran the wife through the standard questionnaire for the kids. It asked if we had guns in the house. Unfortunately, she was honest with the nurse. IIRC, the nurse only followed it up with another question like, "Do you keep them locked up/secure/unloaded/etc.".

Once it's on the medical records, it can't be taken off, so of course... we're screwed.

 

[ArfinGreebly]

Safety As Medicine

I have some difficulty with the concept of "safety as medicine."

It smacks of nerf-ism.

In every hazardous endeavor in which I've ever engaged, whether competitive sports, driving, outdoor activities, or whatever, the trainers and purveyors of the subject at hand have always had their own safety doctrines.

I bought a boat. Got a safety lecture.
I bought a car. Got several safety lectures from all manner of interested folk.
I bought a bicycle. More safety lectures.
I bought paint at a hardware store. Got another safety lecture.
I bought a gun. Shockingly, I got another safety lecture.

When I go someplace and buy something that has known associated hazards, in many places the person selling it to me sizes me up and kind of does a "basic competence check" (you know how to handle these, right?) if I seem at all uncertain. If I've been there before and they already know me, it's taken as read.

It doesn't always happen. In many places the assumption is made that, if I'm buying it, I must already know what I'm doing or, if I don't, I'll ask.

I'm fine with that.

I've worked in places that had a safety officer. His job was to make sure that, among other things, anyone using a hazardous piece of equipment was properly briefed or trained on its use, and advised on the safety considerations.

And I'm fine with that, too.

When it comes to doctors, it seems to me that their domain would include stuff that directly affects the health of the body from a medical point of view. Diet falls in that domain. Sex and related diseases fall within that domain. Smoking can be argued either way: you get so many warnings from so many sources on smoking, you have to wonder whether a doctor's warning is going to get any traction. Basic sanitation, hygiene and stuff like that fall in a doctor's domain.

But "safety" as a general topic? No. Medicine does not consist in preventing injury.

Further, the attempt to "centralize" safety counseling under the rubric of "medicine" carries its own hazard: namely that those who ought to bear the burden of safety training abdicate that responsibility because "doctors are doing that now."

However, for firearms in particular, including them in the "health risks" section of medical practice tends to frame the subject as falling into the same domain as disease. It then becomes plausible for someone to speak in terms of "the epidemic" of gun ownership, or in terms of an "unhealthy interest" in guns.

Once guns become "disease" an argument can be made that "disease is not a civil right."

Yeah, that's a pretty goofy take, but "goofy" presumes that there aren't people who think like that or, worse, people willing to make that argument regardless of what they actually believe.

If the medical form I filled out had actually had a "safety" section, and if there had been other safety questions that had some reasonable plausibility (locally, we have lots of outdoor sports, so "plausible" would include biking, boating, skiing, hiking, hunting, fishing, etc.) it might not have looked out of place, but a lone question straggling some ways down from "smoking" amid all the other "medical history" questions was jarringly non sequitur.

In other words, if you're going to plead that "medicine is concerned with safety" it would make sense to at least field a reasonable pretense of it.

"Have guns?" is not safety. It's not disease prevention. It's not a chronic health issue.

And, on top of that, "safety" isn't medicine. "Prevention" isn't actually medicine, either, but a case can be made for "preventive medicine" in the context of nutrition, hygiene, protecting yourself from VD, and other contagion issues.

Hippocrates: First, do no harm.

Hippocrates revised: First, allow no harm to come to anyone.

I do believe the Oath is being stretched well beyond its bounds.

 

[Flopsweat]

I've heard this comment before.

I guess it's a little off-topic (for my own thread! ), but what "safety" topics are out of a physician's expertise? Safety belts? Bike helmets? Domestic violence? Storage of household chemicals? Child safety locks?

If firearms, why firearms? I know we might disagree with the AMA's opinion (does the AMA have a stated opinion on patient gun ownership?), but I'm not sure how we go from there to saying they have no expertise.

There is this amusing study, which found in partuh--they actually had to do a study to find that out?

I think Arfin made some good points on this, but of course I have more to say. A medical degree is a completely different animal than safety degree. "Wear a helmet" and so forth is common sense, not expertise. When they start collecting data, especially considering where it's going, that is stepping over the line. Is the AMA anti-gun? Yes. Google it. Here's one example: http://www.nrawinningteam.com/0112/ama.html


From the article you referenced:

ADVICE OFFERED

Because the clinician's household gun ownership was such a strong independent predictor of firearm safety counseling, we wanted to understand whether clinicians who had guns in their homes counseled differently from those clinicians who did not have guns in their homes. We did this by the content of their firearm safety counseling advice (not given in the tables). Both groups of clinicians were equally likely to include a discussion of proper handgun storage. Additionally, both groups counseled on keeping guns away from children. However, clinician household gun owners who counseled were more likely to include advice about teaching children how to use firearms. Fifteen percent of clinician household gun owners reported counseling that "All children should be taught how to handle firearms safely when they are old enough," vs 4% of clinician household non–gun owners (2=16.1, df=1, P =.001). Furthermore, 30% of clinician household gun owners offered the advice, "Children in families that keep firearms should be taught how to use them safely when they are old enough" vs 9% of clinician household non–gun owners (2=26.9, df =1, P=.001). Finally, 42% of household gun owners would suggest that "Families with children should remove firearms from their home" vs 78% of clinician counselors who did not have a gun in their home (2=17.1, df=1, P =.001).

This would lead me to believe that doctors who don't own firearms (most of them) are not generally qualified to offer responsible advice on firearm safety beyond "Keep them inaccessible to the little ones". Ditto for some who do own firearms.

 

[TRX]

Never had the subject come up. But when I took my wife to a cancer specialist last year, I was surprised and amused to see the waiting room was full of "Combat Handguns", "Hot Rod Magazine", and other publications, most current, with the clinic's name on the address label.

Beats the hell out of "Modern Maturity" or "Can't Tell If It's a Magazine or an Advertising Pamphlet"...

 

[bikerdoc]

My dentist, cardiologist, ortho sugreon, GP, and Pain mgt MD all shoot. I have taught some of their kinfolk and patients that they have asked me to help with.

The grand kids former pediatrician was tree hugging, granola eating anti. Educated up north.
When the "question" came up we found a real southern doc for them. You see both the wife and I are retired RN's and are not intimdated by pompous buttheads.

 

[HeXeD775]

LOL

Every time I see GP in a post Im thinking GP100

 

[Gillster]

It's never come up at my Doc's office, although he does have a Texas Trophy Hunters bumper sticker on his truck, but at my older sons 3 year check up the pedi said something along the lines of "of course there's no guns in the house?". I replied "You know you live in Texas, right?" The next question was "are you going to teach you kids proper gun safety" and the topic has never come up again.

 

[stonecutter2]

Going to my GP for the first time in years today for a checkup (i'm in my mid 30's). Timely conversation then I wonder if the topic will come up - I may have to get blood work done to check cholesterol etc, so I think I'm going to ask about lead/mercury levels since I do reload.

As for the pediatrician asking about guns, they simply have a child's best interests at heart. I don't think it's too intrusive of a question, but I can understand concern about it. I doubt anyone is going to search through med files for a question about guns. They just want to do their diligence to say that they should be locked up.

 

[deadasslast2004]

dr advice on guns

hmmmm they cause lead poisoning?

he dont tell me how to reload and i dont tell him what medicines I need.

 

[FROGO207]

The topic never came up in the process of the visit. A couple of the nurses there are personal friends and know I am a gun nut and I have helped them and their SO's with things firearm related/range time/reloading help in the past. Now my dentist is another matter. We talk 223 platforms and long range shooting with them every time I go. He is presently trying to get his Mini 14 to shoot as good as my newer Ranch Rifle does.

 

[dprice3844444]

dr advice on guns

usually,it's take 2 45's and call back in the morning

 

[chicharrones]

A nurse ran the wife through the standard questionnaire for the kids. It asked if we had guns in the house. Unfortunately, she was honest with the nurse. IIRC, the nurse only followed it up with another question like, "Do you keep them locked up/secure/unloaded/etc.".

Once it's on the medical records, it can't be taken off, so of course... we're screwed.

Same goes for people with concealed carry licenses. Once you get one, you're on a list. There's probably a few other things like that, too.

 

[Loosedhorse]

In other words, if you're going to plead that "medicine is concerned with safety" it would make sense to at least field a reasonable pretense of it.

I'm not going to "plead" anything. However, I have shown you a couple of patient questionnaires that had multiple "safety questions"; one of them also had a gun question, while the other did not. It is you (and apparently, your doctor) claiming that there is some "association" out there that is pushing a questionnaire that has a gun question in isolation of any other safety question.

Medicine does not consist in preventing injury.

Well, obviously, that can be your opinion. However, doctors have been publishing articles on preventing firearms injuries the 1890s (so says the Journal of Preventive Medicine, the very existence of which indicates a concern with preventing injuries as well as illness). If that's not enough, there is a peer-reviewed medical journal called Injury Prevention, and a Society for the Advancement of Violence and Injury Research, the board of which is largely medical doctors. Also, many medical schools now have identifiable centers dedicated solely to the study of injury prevention (like this one).

We have a local "hero" here, Dr. Paul Vinger, who is almost single-handedly responsible for the fact that your shooting glasses (and mine) are made out of polycarbonate plastic rather than "safety glass." His interest in eye protection in part grew from his passion for hockey, and he has prevented more eye injuries with his work than most eye doctors will ever treat.

Like I said, you can say that medicine has nothing to do with injury prevention, and that's fine; but medicine itself seems to have come to the opposite conclusion.

A medical degree is a completely different animal than safety degree.

What's your point?

There are different levels of expertise among doctors. A doctor who isn't a neurosurgeon won't be doing any neurosurgery, but may have had enough training in the subject to discuss the basics with a patient.

It is to me a bizarre idea that one must have some special "safety doctorate" to discuss basic safety principles (gun or otherwise) with a patient. I understand Arfin's point that he is annoyed by repetitive safety messsages that he's already received from other sources; but not your insistence that medical training contains not even basic safety education.

Even if we take a look at the "axis of evil" of antigun authors (Kellermann, Hemenway, and Miller--who have made their share of "contributions" to the New England Journal of Medicine), we can discuss why we think their studies and conclusions are wrong...

But we won't get very far arguing that they are not experts. We'll just look foolish.

 

[Smith357]

I mentioned to my eye doctor that I'm a shooter, he adjusted my bifocals on my new glasses so I could acquire my sights better.

 

[pockets]

In my short 59 years of living, raising 2 sons, and being at various doctors often....absolutely no question about firearms has ever been presented to me by doctors, etc.
For the past 14 years my wife has managed a fairly large family-practice medical center (part of Ohio State University Hospital system). The docs there do not normally ask such things of the patients. In fact, she looked at me like I had three heads when I brought this subject up to her. Her response was, "Where in the heck are doctors asking that question?".

Looking at the poll, I see nearly 3/4 of us have had the same experience; a complete non-issue.

.

 

[Erik M]

no medical doctor ever asked me about firearms. I do however know my dentist and his family outside work and he happens to be a collector or old west guns so the subject comes up when i see him.

 

[scaatylobo]

Still teaching them

Know a few close friends that are Dr's and dentists.

They are aware I was LEO and were VERY curious as to my interest teaching them how to really handle a handgun.

I was firearms instr and have since taught more than a few how to shoot and actually handle their guns.

I am of the strong opinion ,if ANY get range time = they are hooked.

Many of those I instructed got their permits to CCW and still shoot and train with me.

 

[BADUNAME37]

I had a doctor tell me she is flat-out AGAINST GUNS as they are made for killing. :banghead:

If anyone ever breaks into her house, I wonder what her plan is to survive until the police make it there, in, say, an hour or more.

 

[Ky Larry]

It has never come up except with the Army doctor who rebuilt my knee. Turns out, he was an avid quail hunter. We spent many fall days hunting all over central North Carolina. He was a heck of a nice guy. That was in the 1970's. If a doctor did ask me about my guns, I would politely tell him/her it was none of their business. If they persisted, I would change doctors.

 

[velojym]

While the only doctor I've ever discussed 'em with was an avid shooter, I don't agree with the CDC juggernaut that they're a "disease" issue..... they just want even the lamest excuse to grow their power and influence.
The only time a doctor has any business regarding firearms is when he or she is treating a wound. Then it should only really have to do with best restoring the victim to full health.

 

[Flopsweat]

Well, LH, I've tried to explain my position. It's pretty simple: Doctors, especially GP's and pediatricians, are not safety experts. Now that you've decided that it's "bizarre" I guess we're finished. I hope we can have more civil discourse in the future. I've enjoyed reading many of your other posts.

 

[Saakee]

My doctor saw my sidearm on my laptop's screen when he came in on my first visit with him (I was editing the shot since there was some glare and the photo was for a contest submission of "what's in your pocket right now"), his first question was "Hey, welcome to my practice. Why'd you go with a Glock instead of a 1911?" Sadly, he moved about six months later to Chicago of all places.

 

[Loosedhorse]

It's pretty simple: Doctors, especially GP's and pediatricians, are not safety experts. Now that you've decided that it's "bizarre" I guess we're finished.

Up to you, of course. But let's be clear about what I've stated:

1. "Medicine" has clearly decided to concern itself with trauma prevention, and has for decades.
2. Doctors do give, and have for decades given, basic safety info.
3. Some doctors are in fact recognized (nationally and world-wide) safety experts.
4. Those doctors who are not those experts are nevertheless instructed about safety topics as part of their training; just as they are instructed in other medical topics (I gave the example of neurosurgery) in which they may not be experts.
5. One does not need to be a "safety expert" to give basic safety info.

As to bizarre, hey: maybe when you pull into a gas station, and a guy offers to check your oil, you ask him first to show you his PhD in automobile engineering. I don't know. But it seems equivalent to your statement that only safety "experts" (whatever those are) are allowed to give basic safety advice.

 

[Pilot]

During the "meet-n-greet" cycle of getting to know our latest GP, I noted the "do you have guns in the home" question on the intake profile form.

No other "object" questions, just the "guns?" thing. No "activity" questions (do you swim/boat/ski/sky-dive) either.

I mentioned it to him: "Kinda odd having a political question on a medical questionnaire." I'm apparently not the first one to remark on that.

He was kinda sheepish. Not his idea, evidently. "It's a standard form that we get from the association." They download them as PDF files and print them out.

Pretty much the majority of folks up here are a "yes" answer on that question.

This was my EXACT experience as well. I declined to answer that specific question on the form and nobody said anything.

 

[Nuclear]

My last doc (need to get a new one since I moved) didn't even blink when I mentioned I wanted a blood lead level test.