olafhardtB
Member
- Joined
- May 8, 2011
- Messages
- 393
I wonder, could an insurance company deny your claim because you falsified the application. They might especially for lead poisoning or gun related injury.
I've been absolutely open with the family Doc about my hobbies. All it's done is get the kids lead levels tested ( low/none)
And my own.... Surprisingly high... too much soft lead in an indoor range... I'm still hemming and hawing on a lead filtermask for the range.
So it was a good thing. I found out that I literally DO shoot too much. Anyone have a suggestion for a small, but effective mask ?
I certainly disagree that accident prevention is none of the doc's business. But, if it makes people feel better to lie about it, then fine: lie.
The underlying problem and cause for the legislation is not the fact that the doctor asked but that he DENIED treatment to a child for the mother not answering.Interesting: a lot of assumptions, without much fact.
1. Can health insurance companies access the data in your medical record? Yes absolutely. They are allowed to do that for the purposes of claims verification (making sure your doc actually did what he charged them for) and for statistical analysis (for example, seeing what their costs are, re whether they need to adjust their premiums upward. Again.)
Health plans are not allowed by law to use your info to adjust your personal rates (life insureance plans, however, are not bound by the same law). For example, if you ski, health plans are not allowed to exclude you from a group plan (at work, for example) that you would otherwise qualify for; nor are they allowed to charge you more to join.
Some plans have "Wellness plans" and charge members less if they don't smoke, for example. But use of firearm ownership or storage info for the purposes of a wellness plan is prohibitted by P.L. 111-148.
2. Can health plans deny claims if you provide false info? I suspect if you lie on your application for coverage, they can and would do that. However, most folks get their coverage via open enrolment" at their place of work; there is usually very little health info asked (except of course for the notorious "previously existing conditions" if you didn't have coverage when those conditions arose) on those. Lying on a physician's questionnaire has no such penalties in general (although I wonder if that would still be true in the Armed Forces, or by extention, in the VA medical system).
3. FL passed a law... Yes, they did; as JD said above, it's being challenged and its constitutionality will be decided.
I'm not sure I see the nefarious intent that many here assume; and I certainly disagree that accident prevention is none of the doc's business. But, if it makes people feel better to lie about it, then fine: lie.
Do you not see the slippery slope here? How long of a list could a doctor deny you treatment based on your refusal to answer questions?The American Association of Pediatrics urges pediatricians to ask questions of parents about gun ownership when they get children's medical histories and to suggest that parents remove guns from the home.
Thinking cap, likely liberal and highly educated know what's best for us and telling us how to live. Never mind you can and should do these things RESPONSIBLY and your child won't get hurt."The American Academy of Pediatrics' position on firearm-related injuries states 'the absence of guns from children's homes and communities is the most reliable and effective measure to prevent firearm-related injuries' to them."
"The American Academy of Pediatrics' position on firearm-related injuries states 'the absence of guns from children's homes and communities is the most reliable and effective measure to prevent firearm-related injuries' to them."
LMAOSo abstinence is the best form of safe firearms handling? Considering the logic the same people use on sex I expected it to be education and kevlar.
...With Obama care starting to come into power as the months progress
* I think it is prudent that all of us look at the questions on medical forms with more skepticism.
* I find no reason for a MD. to know about my fire arms activities and how many I may or may not own. However, it looks like with all the electronic data being collected it could be just one more way to track gun owners.
Wow, Dnaltrop you can't be too old then... Emergen-C was introduced to the market in 1994I've generally been taking 2 packets Daily of Emergen-C since my early teens, so the C is covered.
I don't know if it's just a feel-good measure, or if it has any real effect as I have not laid eyes on hard medical data, but I also once in a while take a few weeks worth of Bentonite clay as an adsorbent. (http://www.sonnes.com/products_line_7.html)
I'll let people know how the lead levels adjust once I hit my follow-up date.
it was required by the federal government that they ask all clients on their first visit since the rule went into effect
It's one of the intrusive privacy violations that obamacare requires
No. Nor are they teaching swimming pool design, fence installation or life-guard certification. Still, your doctor may properly ask you (if you have young kids) if you have a pool, how it is secured, and whether your kids can swim.Are they teaching firearms safety in medical school now?
You are perhaps suggesting that only a "real gun expert" (like us?) should be allowed to advise parents to keep their firearms safely stored, away from children?He said he asks such questions of all his patients so he can advise parents to lock their guns away from children.
"I don't tell them to get rid of the guns," he said. "The purpose is to give advice."
Naaaaaaasortof.The underlying problem and cause for the legislation is not the fact that the doctor asked but that he DENIED treatment to a child for the mother not answering.
The story does mention that the mother not only refused to answer the questions, but threatened to sue the doctor--a reasonable doctor is going to choose to have such a mother in his practice?He said the doctor and patient have to develop a relationship of trust and that if parents won't answer such basic safety questions, they cannot trust each other about more important health issues.
He said he respected a patient's right not to answer questions, but it was also his right to no longer treat them, and he isn't required by law to do so.
Sure. Slippery slope arguments, however, have limited validity. They are, for example, among the most important arguments used by antigunners to justify taking away our legal rights in certain places or in certain situations.Do you not see the slippery slope here?
You're right. I misread it as the doctor stopped the examination but he did at least finish it before telling her to find another doctor.Your representation of the facts is one-sided. First, the doctor did not refuse treatment; instead he asked that the mother find a new doctor within the next 30 days (doctors are not legally or ethically allowed to refuse emergency patients).
I said nothing about whom he can or can't have in his practice except based on that one question alone.The story does mention that the mother not only refused to answer the questions, but threatened to sue the doctor--a reasonable doctor is going to choose to have such a mother in his practice?
(You are perhaps arguing that the doctor has no right to decide whom to have in his practice?)
Other patients voluntarily answering the question gives no basis to argue that she should be forced to answer the question or go elsewhere. Just because X number of patients have done it doesn't make it right. I wasn't suggesting that he would've denied her treatment if she told him she had guns. I don't see your point here.The doctor said that half of the patients he DOES treat have firearms in the house--he has no problem with treating them. And the family mentioned no hardship in finding another pediatrician.
I do agree with you here. You should be able to decline to answer any irrelevant question like that and the doctor should not have the right to prevent you from being his patient any longer. I would voluntarily leave his practice and go somewhere else though knowing his agenda to preach to me about gun and pool safety.If, after the above, we are still to suppose that was the underlying reason for the FL law was this instance, then the law should have stated (simply) that it was illegal for a doctor to discharge a patient from his/her care for non-answer (or a yes answer, or a no answer) to the gun question (instaed of specifying that merely asking the question could result in disciplinary action against doctors).
The characteristic "sweet taste" is the reason why so many kids eat lead paint.
I wonder, could an insurance company deny your claim because you falsified the application. They might especially for lead poisoning or gun related injury.