wtf my daughters school telling her hunting is bad

[mike rossi]

OK, so you are saying the ACA does not require gun related questions, but it does not disallow them either.

 

I believe merely asking these questions would not violate HIPPA, a violation would not occur unless the provider violated someone's privacy by sharing that information. Therefore, I don't see how the ACA and HIPPA are in conflict.

 

However, the chatter among the sporting community ( which I have not bothered to verify) is that the safe act does in fact require providers to disclose information about certain medications or conditions, but not necessarily access to firearms. (The HIPPA laws were designed to protect information about health status, which makes this laughable when you think about it...) Anyway getting back on track... (If) it is true that the safe act requires doctors to report patients with certain conditions or under certain treatment regimes , ie medications; and/or their access to firearms;  that sounds like it would be inconsistent with hippa laws. I think to determine if so or not would require reviewing  the relevant parts of safe act and the hippa laws. No thanks, not me Jackson...  

[jjb4900]

I would hope that if the situation warrants it, that someone would dig a little deeper and look into whether or not some people have access to weapons...........

[mike rossi]

Mike Rossi, my post about dodging the issue was not directed at you.  Apologies if it looked that way.  It was directed at the previous post.

 

Never thought it was directed at me, I just thought this was better to stay out of. I didn't look anything up and don't plan to, though I might get bored and do so at some point, lol..  I don't really want to delve too deep into this.

[virgil]

Mike, you're right about the ACA and HIPAA part.  There really is no issue there.  HIPAA relates to disclosure of private health information and does not regulate conversations between provider and patient.

 

Under the SAFE act, licensed healthcare practitioners are obligated to report a patient who, in their professional clinical judgement, is a danger to himself or others.  Most states have similar laws.  NY's law changed from 'permissive' to mandatory this past year.

[mike rossi]

So then, this isn't entirely novel and  apparently states have the authority to do this under HIPAA. or is the upgrade from  permissive to mandatory novel?

[virgil]

This is not new.  Most states have had mandatory reporting.  New York upgraded from permissive to mandatory last year.  But, there are other circumstances where practitioners have been obligated to 'break' HIPAA laws, for example when we suspect abuse or neglect.  An example would be if an ER doc is treating a child (or older person) and sees signs of abuse (multiple healed fractures, frequent unexplained injuries, malnourishment, etc.)- they are obligated to report.  This is not new and is not considered a violation of HIPAA laws.

[mike rossi]

That sounds like this brings NY up to speed with the majority of states. I think that is a far cry from claims that providers will be legally obligated to report patients with mental health conditions or who have been prescribed certain medications.

 

Here are three questions which explore that claim:

 

1) Without knowledge of a patients access to firearms or if the patient denies he has access to firearms; and the provider of a patient within that medical paradigm does not feel that a patient is a threat to himself or others, is the provider obligated under the safe act to inform the authorities?

 

2) If the provider of a patient within that medical paradigm is aware or suspects a patient has access to firearms; but does not feel that he is a threat to himself or others, is the provider obligated under the safe act to inform the authorities? 

 

3) Or is the state police going to maintain a database of everybody within that medical paradigm and cross reference it at the point of every ammunition or firearm sale?

Edited February 7, 2014 by mike rossi

[Culvercreek hunt club]

Mike, I don't think there has been enough transparency about  question thee, in the Safe Act. without clearly stating their intentions and use  in the law it has many in the gun owning community on guard.

[silent death]

This is not a political thread......it has nothing to do with doctors or anything

Relating to them....this has thread has gotten way off topic .....

[hunter49]

This is not a political thread......it has nothing to do with doctors or anything

Relating to them....this has thread has gotten way off topic .....

      Agreed 100%,  Coyote hunter I still want to hear your story & how its going.

 

    As to the Hippa post here I had a friend tell his Dr. that he drinks a case of beer a week & by the time he was leaving the Dr. office had called AA & they wanted to take him to dry out, he told them to go to hell & left!  total  BS.

[mike rossi]

Mike, I don't think there has been enough transparency about  question thee, in the Safe Act. without clearly stating their intentions and use  in the law it has many in the gun owning community on guard.

 

They are right, this got off topic, I said that myself a few posts back... But I get your point.

Edited February 7, 2014 by mike rossi

[WNYBuckHunter]

At the request of the OP, I am locking this up