No AW Ban

[Mayonnaise]

I only ask what I need to know in order to help the person, but I am free to ask anything I want to. There are no boundaries which is good in a sense that I can get all the information I need in order to help but bad in the sense that there are a lot of shitty therapists out there who may ask compromising questions for no real purpose. Yes, I said it, some therapists I wouldn't allow to flip my burger at McD's much less ask my innermost thoughts. Like anything else, if you are a consumer of mental healthcare you need to choose a person you trust, respect and who you feel good about talking to.

Did the executive order actually change anything? Does it give you any latitude? Is there anything you can do now, with the information on gun ownership, that you could not do before? Sorry for the string of questions, just trying to understand why the executive order was signed.

 

[Cheesy Lasagna]

I am unaware of any benefit to my practice arising from the recent EO. As I stated, if needed, I could already report gun ownership if there were any real reasons to do so. I believe this EO is only going to enable anti 2A providers more latitude in reporting and I fear it will be abused since now they can report with absolutely no reason other than "they have a gun." I don't like it and do not believe it serves any truly useful therapeutic purpose.

 

[Cheesy Lasagna]

I am also concerned that this will keep many people from obtaining mental health services as well. People are already shy about seeking these services. I give a spiel at the beginning of services about what I can and cannot do with their PHI. I have a conversation with them about it so they know how it all works and that I am not going to divulge their secrets unless there is a pressing need to do so. I wonder how that conversation is going to change with the new EO. Likely not too drastic a difference but I just don't like it; I am not the eyes of Big Brother, I'm just a guy who tries his best to help people.

 

[Cheesy Lasagna]

Here are the two executive orders that speak to therapist/patient privilege.

16. Clarify that the Affordable Care Act does not prohibit doctors asking their patients about guns in their homes.

17. Release a letter to health care providers clarifying that no federal law prohibits them from reporting threats of violence to law enforcement authorities.

Order 16 was never an issue since it is presently legal to ask about firearms ownership and location if deemed necessary. (Necessary is in the viewpoint of the provider so it boils down to professional decision making.)
Order 17 is nothing new either except that it is purposefully vague. As law stands now, imminent threat of harm to self or others is the guideline for reporting. This order opens it up to "threats of violence." I am guessing that figures of speech like, "I am going to get that guy" from a frustrated person now open up the possibility of reporting. It somewhat removes the distinction of imminent threat of danger to just threat of violence.

Just my opinion and we will see where the laws go.

 

[sloppy joe]

my friend got a prescription for citalopram to help him not to get upset/mad so quickly and fight high blood pressure. will he pass a mental health back ground check?

 

[Nomad.2nd]

my friend got a prescription for citalopram to help him not to get upset/mad so quickly and fight high blood pressure. will he pass a mental health back ground check?

At this time, Involuntary commitment is the only barrier.

 

[Cheesy Lasagna]

At this time, Involuntary commitment is the only barrier.

Exactly.

 

[Cheesy Lasagna]

But a brief involuntary commitment is not going to remove your firearm rights.
You must be declared mentally unsound by a Judge during a general sanity hearing.
Then your gun rights go away.
Just a temporary involuntary commitment (not longer than two weeks plus 72 hours) will not revoke your rights or even be reported.

 

[TruBrew]

But a brief involuntary commitment is not going to remove your firearm rights.
You must be declared mentally unsound by a Judge during a general sanity hearing.
Then your gun rights go away.
Just a temporary involuntary commitment (not longer than two weeks plus 72 hours) will not revoke your rights or even be reported.

So the way you read it, this does not affect people who have been admitted PEC or CEC? If so that is good.

 

[Cheesy Lasagna]

So the way you read it, this does not affect people who have been admitted PEC or CEC? If so that is good.

That is how it stands currently. I have not seen legislation proposed to the contrary as of yet.

 

[Nomad.2nd]

But a brief involuntary commitment is not going to remove your firearm rights.
You must be declared mentally unsound by a Judge during a general sanity hearing.
Then your gun rights go away.
Just a temporary involuntary commitment (not longer than two weeks plus 72 hours) will not revoke your rights or even be reported.

Excuse me... By a Judge is I believe how it reads...

 

[Vanilla Gorilla]

Believe it or not it is incredible difficult to have an adult committed involuntarily for a long period. I have seen some very I'll and very dangerous people walk out of Sanit Hearings.

 

[Cheesy Lasagna]

http://www.atf.gov/forms/download/atf-f-4473-1.pdf

Read the verbiage- it specified the term "adjudicated" and offers exceptions if you were adjudicated but recovered (got better; the easy way of describing it.)

Note that it does apply to anyone found not guilty of a crime who plead insanity or was seen as mentally unfit to stand trial. In those cases, you lose your rights.

 

[Cheesy Lasagna]

Believe it or not it is incredible difficult to have an adult committed involuntarily for a long period. I have seen some very I'll and very dangerous people walk out of Sanit Hearings.

The courts usually err on the side of the defendant. It is pretty serious stuff to have someone committed for an extended period; to say that a person has lost all civil rights and is to be remanded contrary to their will is not to be taken without prudence.

And I agree fully, many people who would be best served by a longer duration of stay involuntarily are not remanded. The hard thing to convince judges of is that this is not imprisonment. It is remanding for treatment so the individual can recover from (or stabilize) their mental illness as well as to protect that person and the public. It is not meant to be punitive, it is meant to be a curative.

 

[rrussotwo]

Believe it or not it is incredible difficult to have an adult committed involuntarily for a long period. I have seen some very I'll and very dangerous people walk out of Sanit Hearings.

This. As a kid my uncle (not related as he was adopted) had severe mental health issues, but he was harmless. He found solace as a Monk before he died.

My neighbor on the other hand had delusions and would become violent when his delusions were questioned.

He spent time in an out of institutions until they were shut down. I shudder to think what would have become of him today.

 

[cajun_64]

Excellent information!

Now he wants to tighten up background checks and require for all transactions. He also wants to share more patient information....

Do you trust the current un-administration to set the bar low for that information.

That is all i am trying to say, his comments set up his end game, in the name of mental health, for getting the reporting allowed to prevent said persons from purchasing a firearm. And backgorund checks on even provate sales and....

Any and all mood altering, stabilizing, concentrating drug out there, along with medical help, will stay in your history

 

[crazy_mike]

Has anyone seen the video about what ny government is wanting to do? Youtube has a clip not sure if it is true, but they were talking about door to door and taking guns

 

[crazy_mike]

Has anyone seen the video about what ny government is wanting to do? Youtube has a clip not sure if it is true, but they were talking about door to door and taking guns

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ryUbJfg4tAo&feature=youtube_gdata_player


got the link

 

[ZombieHuntr]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ryUbJfg4tAo&feature=youtube_gdata_player


got the link

That is just pure pigshit! Wtf..... the **** is getting plain stupid now. I hope this isn't true.

 

[crazy_mike]

I agree and if they want, they can meet mrs 22 and mr 308 and all three of thier kids 30.06 30-30 and big 12 lol