Friggin' Liberal Doctors!

[cekim]

I think it's Obamacare. My daughter had a physical and they asked her if there was a gun in the house. She said yes. After that they grilled my wife if there was a safe, lock, if the ammo was seperated. We are sending an email of complaint. My daughter runs cross country and the doctor said in the report she was underweight for her height, but she didn't mention that to my wife. I am outraged. I was going to start a new thread, but I saw this one. I will go back to read all the posts. Subscribed.

I'd like to hear netdoc and bender try to justify the medicinal value of this interrogation.

go ahead, we'll wait....

As previously discussed, this predates obamacare, but it is the same statist, progressive thought process that is driving it that is also driving Obamacare.

 

[FrugalFannie]

Let's not forget that all your info will be digitized on a database per Obamacare. I am already seeing this happen. I had something wrong with my hand and went to see a doctor. When I left they handed me a piece of paper with instructions to 'log in' and see all my info from the visit. This means it's on a database. This means it's searchable.

 

[CosmicIrony]

Just following orders...is all.......

If you can't see the difference between having a government and living in a fascist dictatorship, then it is not surprising that people find it hard to have discussions with you.

 

[CosmicIrony]

Let's not forget that all your info will be digitized on a database per Obamacare. I am already seeing this happen. I had something wrong with my hand and went to see a doctor. When I left they handed me a piece of paper with instructions to 'log in' and see all my info from the visit. This means it's on a database. This means it's searchable.

The days of information privacy are over. We have to deal with the reality that information is going to be collected, stored, correlated, etc. That genie is out of the bottle - all we can do now is try to establish laws that limit what uses the government can make of its information. When both parties can unite to enact something like the Patriot Act or NDAA, I don't feel very hopeful.

 

[rlee]

The days of information privacy are over. We have to deal with the reality that information is going to be collected, stored, correlated, etc.

Agreed.

... all we can do now is try to establish laws that limit what uses the government can make of its information.

This will be no more a guarantee than gun-free zones are.

I choose to limit as much as possible the amount of information I provide.
It's not always easy.

My doctor provides me with copies of his notes.
In a checkup last year, I made a wry self-deprecatory comment about my weight.
At the next appointment, there was my comment. As innocuous as it was in reality, in print it could be mis-interpreted as a sign of depression.
And this was a very good doctor.
As a result, I now confine my comments to the business at hand. And never anything about guns.

 

[calsdad]

It seems as if any perceived "negative" about guns leads to outraged threads on NES. Recently, I considered responding to a few threads about criminals caught by police with guns where people responded with support for the criminal. This current thread is another one where, as responsible gun owners, we should be informed and aware of the risks and negatives of gun ownership. If we ignore these completely, we may lose credibility for more important stances on issues.

Physicians should ask about gun ownership, just as they should ask about seat belt usage and other issues. There have been many, many well done studies approaching this from many different directions and published in prestigious journals that demonstrate a very significant - 2-5 fold increase - in suicides in homes where guns are readily available. Depression is a very real issue for a substantial percentage of society, and thoughts of suicide are quite common. Of all the methods of suicide, guns are both rapid and effective. Suicidal thinking often passes or can be managed, but not if someone has already acted on the impulse. Before arguing with the points I have made, I suggest you read a relatively recent editorial in the NEJM - arguably the most influential medical journal in the world: http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMp0805923

This is not about liberal doctors. It is about good doctors, doing their job properly. The responses to such a questionnaire aren't going to go in some "big brother" database. They are going to help guide your physician when he/she might wonder about depression or suicide risk.

You're wrong about the big brother database thing. Or have not been paying attention to anything that has happened in this country over the last four years or so?

 

[fubar]

I think that I am going to die one day. And pretty much everyone I ever met will too. A very real aspect of our political system , with ObamaCare is the concern that doctors , insurance accountants , and politicians are going to set the rules for when they tell us it's time to stop getting medical help. And ironically , like every policy passed by our Left , there is a man with a gun to enforce it if need be.

Is it suicidal or anti-social to be concerned that the Government and it's agencies may be heading in the direction where one day we may be faced with the choice to try to kill them ? How about if we would rather be dead than comply ?

I saw a guy the other day who seemed to think death was better than losing his freedom. He had these words on his car " Live Free or Die."

Someone needs to report that guy. I think he lives in Conway NH.

 

[calsdad]

Depression is an illness that physicians are trained to treat, and it is a substantial part of the practice of any internist. It is there job to look for, detect, and treat depression in their patients. And, in depressed patients, it is their job to assess the risk of suicide, both in the thoughts of the patient and the likelihood of it occurring. Patients saved from suicides by medication and other treatment are typically very pleased that they weren't simply ignored.

Studies on suicide and guns aren't "anti" studies. They are medical studies. Like it or not, sometimes the weight of medical literature falls in the wrong direction for convenience. For years, people railed against studies showing the danger of smoking. Whether or not you take that risk, there is no question about the conclusion that smoking causes emphysema and lung cancer. Same thing here; there are enough well done studies demonstrating this risk to demonstrate that it is correct. When published in places like the NEJM, they have been scrutinized by expert statisticians before being published.

Good medicine (esp. internal medicine, family medicine and pediatrics) isn't just about fixing a broken bone or treating high blood pressure. It SHOULD be about caring about the patient as a whole - their "medical" problem, the interaction with their psychological state, and their social milieu. Their goal is to maintain patients in a happy, healthy state.

This isn't hubris. It is the discipline of medicine when practiced as we are all trained.

Most of the people in The Matrix were very happy there. Some even wanted back in after they had gotten out.

Happiness alone is not an excuse to do things to people. Or maybe you missed the studies on how happiness is RELATIVE.

 

[Coyote33]

I think that I am going to die one day. And pretty much everyone I ever met will too. A very real aspect of our political system , with ObamaCare is the concern that doctors , insurance accountants , and politicians are going to set the rules for when they tell us it's time to stop getting medical help. And ironically , like every policy passed by our Left , there is a man with a gun to enforce it if need be.

Is it suicidal or anti-social to be concerned that the Government and it's agencies may be heading in the direction where one day we may be faced with the choice to try to kill them ? How about if we would rather be dead than comply ?

I saw a guy the other day who seemed to think death was better than losing his freedom. He had these words on his car " Live Free or Die."

Someone needs to report that guy. ...

How about this guy, doctor:

Amazing read

 

[dcmdon]

You're wrong about the big brother database thing. Or have not been paying attention to anything that has happened in this country over the last four years or so?

4 years? You're kidding. This is part of the problem. Republicans don't want to admit that their politicians are just as bad, albeit in different ways.

The surveillance society began on 9/12/2001 under a Republican president. Sure there had been a gradual erosion of privacy rights before that, but it expanded exponentially in the wake of the 9/11 attacks.

 

[Sterg]

I do not allow my daughter to be examined alone by any physician.

It was a woman doctor. She's 15 and has her Black Belt so I'm not worried.If I was in the room I would have said its none of their buisiness for damn sure.My wife is sending a nasty email.

 

[Rob Boudrie]

It was a woman doctor. She's 15 and has her Black Belt so I'm not worried.If I was in the room I would have said its none of their buisiness for damn sure.My wife is sending a nasty email.

He could have been worried about inappropriate questioning (I wonder of docs are trained to get kids alone for just this reason) rather than molestation.

But, by 15, a kid should know how to handle a medical interrogation. Actually, the kid should have an FID at that time, thus enabling the answer "Our big brother considers it OK for me to have access to the fifty cal dad keep in case of an elephant stampede".

 

[Yiogo]

No, I've never been asked that. But when I went for my first colonoscopy they asked if I was abused at home. They are about to stick me where the sun don't shine and ask if I am abused at HOME. Yiogo

 

[calsdad]

Excuse me? We are licensed by the state, and as part of that licensure we are mandated by law to report child abuse, elder abuse, rape, gunshot wounds, etc. at risk of losing our license and criminal penalties.

I think you're missing his point. Because you actually just backed up what he said.

"MANDATED BY LAW".

You just admitted the exact thing he was attempting to point when he said: " thus forfeiting the position/relationship of trust between physician and patient that would be most beneficial to the field/society as a whole ".

Government is NOT society.

 

[calsdad]

do you think it is wrong for a police officer to place a person in cuffs when they are clearly acting in a manner that is a danger to oneself or others? they are taking away someone's rights at that moment, no different than i would. the Federal and State GOV also puts that burden on me and i must act accordingly. i can be held responsible if i do not.

THIS IS IMPORTANT: do you guys understand that if i do not take upon the responsibility to make the clinical judgement that someone requires possible detention, i can be held responsible for someone's actions. think about that. really think about that for a second. i have a DUTY. if i turn a blind eye, i can get into trouble. loss of license and potential lawsuit. you guys can armchair QB this in the comfort of this thread all night, but this is what i do. this is what nurses and doctors do every day.

seriously, if someone makes real threats of danger, what do you think is the proper thing to do? mind one's business and carelessly (and cowardly) watch horrible events unfold? i get the feeling that some people here would. that is tragic.

Actually......... there was a time in this country when police WERE a lot less likely to just throw you in cuffs at the drop of a hat - because you are a "danger to yourself and others".

I have friends that literally drove their car off the road - ended up upside down in a ditch, and were allowed to walk home by police. When they were obviously drunk off their ass.

Of course this happened 30 years ago. When society as a whole was a lot less likely to carelessly infringe on the rights of others without good reason.

We HAVE turned from that type of society - into one where we believe (well some of us do anyway) - that infringing on a person's "rights" is justified if we are "preventing harm to themselves or others".

I think a lot of us here completely understand the duty that you are referring to. The fact that you are obligated by law to do these things still doesn't change the underlying nature of what you are doing.

This is akin to that thing your mother used to say to you when you were a kid: " if your friend Johnny jumps off the roof - are you going to do it too?" - or - (used in the Nuremberg trials over and over again) : " I was just following orders".

I don't think you understand the depths of contempt and disgust in which many people - gun owners especially - are holding the current state of our society and government. You are trying to use the mechanics and legalities of the machine as an excuse. I understand you are "obligated" to do it - but that is the part that makes it all so onerous and tyrannical.

 

[Rob Boudrie]

thus forfeiting the position/relationship of trust between physician and patient that would be most beneficial to the field/society as a whole

This also happens when a patient has a malady that can almost certainly be cured using the "antibiotic of last resort", but the medical system encourages using ones further down on the food chain first to lessen the chance of resistant bugs evolving - this presenting a direct compromise between the welfare of the patient and society at large.

 

[calsdad]

great post Eddie. thank you. and i am not what Ladysmith says.

i truly came here with good intentions and love going to the range. i am a jeans and T-shirt dad that does not want to take anyone's gun away. i have been trashed and bashed for trying to speak my mind. i am in a ton of student loan debt and don't live the high life. i don't think i am better than anyone, but i have been labeled as a jerk so far and yet i have never really revealed much about me personally.

i do understand what you say and respect that.

anyway, i feel like anything i say from this point forward will be twisted and turned so i will retire from this thread, maybe from the site. i am clearly not welcomed despite my desire to hold an LTC and frequent the range. it sucks because people have been very welcoming in the MA Law forum here. i venture into the General forum and tried to throw my 2 cents in.

but, your post was awesome Eddie and i really appreciate your open mind. regards.

You know bender - part of the reason why you are getting attacked - is right in one of your previous posts.

You said " I serve society" - I may have missed something somewhere along the line - but I thought doctors were supposed to serve people.

 

[calsdad]

I think I said it. Killing yourself with a gun gives you no time to change your mind and back out. (Just like jumping off a bridge.)
So people tend to be more successful at killing themselves with guns.

But so what. If thats their will. So be it.

As a society we have turned into one that punishes success. This is just part of that total picture.

 

[calsdad]

If you can't see the difference between having a government and living in a fascist dictatorship, then it is not surprising that people find it hard to have discussions with you.

The problem is that when you end up with a government that is the size of the one we have now - it is pretty much inevitable that you end up with a dictatorship.

I don't believe there is a single instance in history when it has ever been otherwise.

Ignoring the problem will not make it go away.

- - - Updated - - -

The days of information privacy are over. We have to deal with the reality that information is going to be collected, stored, correlated, etc. That genie is out of the bottle - all we can do now is try to establish laws that limit what uses the government can make of its information. When both parties can unite to enact something like the Patriot Act or NDAA, I don't feel very hopeful.

You can solve the problem. You can get rid of the root of it - which is the government itself.

 

[calsdad]

4 years? You're kidding. This is part of the problem. Republicans don't want to admit that their politicians are just as bad, albeit in different ways.

The surveillance society began on 9/12/2001 under a Republican president. Sure there had been a gradual erosion of privacy rights before that, but it expanded exponentially in the wake of the 9/11 attacks.

I was actually thinking more about Obamacare - but you're correct - in the total picture it began well before that.

 

[LadySmith]

I don't think you understand the depths of contempt and disgust in which many people - gun owners especially - are holding the current state of our society and government.

I, for one, hold the same level of contempt for doctors, too, especially ones who have the "I know better than you" attitude that NetDoc and bender73 have consistently demonstrated here. I am a person who takes excellent care of myself -- no chemicals, lotsa exercise, nobody in my house smokes anything, etc., etc. I have, nevertheless, had the need for doctors and I've been fortunate to find five really amazing ones over the many years of my life. But other than those five great people, most doctors have been arrogant blowhards like we've seen in here. I will never, ever tell them what goes on in my life and I will always shoooo them through their job, which is to diagnose the problem at hand and, otherwise, to STFU.

You are trying to use the mechanics and legalities of the machine as an excuse. I understand you are "obligated" to do it - but that is the part that makes it all so onerous and tyrannical.

Great assessment, calsdad. My hope is that netdoc and bender73, their status of "gods on earth" notwithstanding, will someday soon exprerience the same type of onerous tyranny at the hands of some other governmental entity, e.g., an assessor, an inspector, a board of registration in medicine, a police officer, a licensing agent, etc., etc. May someone arbitrarily deny them their rights if, in fact, they are even "real" doctors. Better yet, may they soon find themselves at the mercy of the medical system and see how horrifying the imbalance of power is, and how frightening the loss of control due to chronic illness can be.

I don't know how else these delusional doctors will ever relate to the world the way that we mere mortals (some of whom are elected officials, professional athletes, actors and actresses, attorneys, scientists, blue-collar workers, service industry workers, waiters and waitresses, busboys, cab-drivers, etc.) do.

 

[pastera]

LadySmith

I understand the position that the doctors here take however wrong we believe them to be, they are completely within their right to have their own opinion. Unfortunately their opinion carries legal weight well beyond what it should have at certain times.

I can thruthfully say that the several doctors that I have known outside of the office have been great people. The professional distance demanded by the job creates a bad perception that is reinforced by those doctors that truely have a god complex. Think about what a toll working in the healthcare field would take on a person who did not maintain that distance. Once in my life a was forced to fire a person, who by his own actions deserved it, and that bothered the hell out of me because I knew the impact on his family. That action is nothing compared to informing a patient that, despite your best efforts, the end is near. Understanding that burden is key in understanding the necessity of professional distance in the medical field.

 

[FrugalFannie]

The days of information privacy are over. We have to deal with the reality that information is going to be collected, stored, correlated, etc. That genie is out of the bottle - all we can do now is try to establish laws that limit what uses the government can make of its information. When both parties can unite to enact something like the Patriot Act or NDAA, I don't feel very hopeful.

Really? We can use physicians who refuse to subject themselvesand theor patients to this invasion.(yes, they exist)
We can also fight to regain our rights to privacy. Eliminate the 'requirements' to digitize and share medical information for starters.

 

[Rob Boudrie]

There is nothing wrong with a doc offering counseling safety issues like "I'd suggest wearing a seatbelt" or "Avoid pouring gasoline into a hot portable engine".

There are two reasons the gun issue from docs raises such ire:

- Some docs cross the line from good advice to meddling. It's one thing to remind someone to keep guns locked up around kids and quite another to suggest the patient would be better off just getting rid of their guns.

- Records. I doubt many docs create a medical record "patient advises he occasionally drives without a seatbelt" and enters this into a database to be shared with other. There is the impression, and I believe rightfully so, that adding this to the record is about covering the docs butt rather than serve the patient. "Gee, I'll make a note of it so I can remember to have someone pick up your guns if I ever have concerns about you...."

- Meddling with rights. It's one thing for a doc to be able to certify someone as mentally unfit, but when they are judge and jury for all practical purposes, it creates a situation where you have to be very careful what you say if you or a family member ever seeks medical help for depression.

 

[Gidge]

I think a lot of us here completely understand the duty that you are referring to. The fact that you are obligated by law to do these things still doesn't change the underlying nature of what you are doing.


I don't think you understand the depths of contempt and disgust in which many people - gun owners especially - are holding the current state of our society and government. You are trying to use the mechanics and legalities of the machine as an excuse. I understand you are "obligated" to do it - but that is the part that makes it all so onerous and tyrannical.

Outstanding !

 

[ArnoldDent]

It is data mining for the insurance companys. Ever since The hippa requirement went into affect they have almost instance access to your medical records.

 

[calsdad]

It is data mining for the insurance companys. Ever since The hippa requirement went into affect they have almost instance access to your medical records.

We could start another whole thread on the utter retardation that is having "insurance" cover ALL of your medical expenses - and why that lies at the root of all of this invasion of privacy and intrusion by the government into our lives.

But let's just say this:

If you need to rely on "insurance" to pay for you medical costs - ALL OF THEM - and EVERYBODY ELSE DOES TOO - then what you are participating in is a scam of some form or another.

Last time I checked you can't get "insurance" for changing the oil in your car and getting a wash & wax & detail on it once a year.

But "health" insurance will pay for comparable things when it's a human being - despite the fact that the human body needs maintainence also.

Quite frankly I think the health care system in this country is majorly broken. And all that keeps happening is more stuff to break it - not more stuff to fix it.

 

[KDeez]

It's one thing to remind someone to keep guns locked up around kids and quite another to suggest the patient would be better off just getting rid of their guns.

+1 All of this is nothing but another way the government will seek to use healthcare in an attempt to restrict our rights. This idea that we can accurately predict who will and won’t commit crime before they actually do is completely irrational. By what right can you, me, or anyone deny someone a right based on pure speculation? And where is the line drawn? And who gets to the draw the line? And ask yourself this question - Do you trust your government to not move the line once they control it?

 

[bill o]

We could start another whole thread on the utter retardation that is having "insurance" cover ALL of your medical expenses - and why that lies at the root of all of this invasion of privacy and intrusion by the government into our lives.

But let's just say this:

If you need to rely on "insurance" to pay for you medical costs - ALL OF THEM - and EVERYBODY ELSE DOES TOO - then what you are participating in is a scam of some form or another.

Last time I checked you can't get "insurance" for changing the oil in your car and getting a wash & wax & detail on it once a year.

But "health" insurance will pay for comparable things when it's a human being - despite the fact that the human body needs maintainence also.

Quite frankly I think the health care system in this country is majorly broken. And all that keeps happening is more stuff to break it - not more stuff to fix it.

If you paid for predictable medical expenses as you incurred them, the prices you paid to the provider would probably be a lot higher than what your insurer has negotiated. Are you as an individual better or worse off for this? It depends.

 

[cekim]

If you paid for predictable medical expenses as you incurred them, the prices you paid to the provider would probably be a lot higher than what your insurer has negotiated. Are you as an individual better or worse off for this? It depends.

This is the "protection racket" that they have created with help from the government and it has utterly failed to control costs in the long term (not surprisingly).

As a function of economics, we are paying a transaction cost to the insurance company on all of these items as well as reducing the "price communication" between producer and consumer (doctor and patient). You cannot "insure" events which are guaranteed to occur. You cannot even "insure" events that are highly likely to occur. All you can do is time shift them and add middle-men and their transaction cost in the process.

The proof is in the pudding of the rise of medical costs over the decades since "managed care" and employer bundled health insurance policies from the "wage control" era before that.

Further, there really isn't much of an "economy of scale" with medical care that would explain what you are espousing. It is a "service," yes they could buy drugs and equipment in bulk, but they can do that regardless of how they treat/bill you. What is missing is the vital information linking their quality and efficiency of treating you that would ordinarily be provided by price pressure. Doctors that cure quickly and reliably charge/profit more per unit - while lowering costs to consumers. Doctors that don't have to charge less and/or go out of business. Reward is provided for good, cost effective care care without broken government intervention that makes things political and rewards mediocrity.

The difference in "negotiated rate" is entirely a function of anti-trust practices in the industry sanction and in many cases even created by the government long before BarryCare or RomneyCare came into the picture.

The arguments that people use to dispute what should be obvious economics are the same basic concepts people use to rationalize socialism and central economic management. The idea that "a room full of smart people" can make a better decision than the market. It is false and has been proven to be so time and time again. What is worse is that it has been proven that when decisions are made in this manner, your access to goods and services - even freedom itself - becomes a political matter.

What you get depends on how important you are and who you know.