|
Post by dbd870 on Apr 19, 2007 6:47:51 GMT -5
I suspect VA's (and many other's) databases need a little work.
|
|
|
Post by JohnSmiles on Apr 19, 2007 19:57:02 GMT -5
Not surprising actually, as I had no idea so many of my friends were on or had once been on the stuff. This last fall I became aware of just how many, and was shocked. John, There is more people taking these types of medications than the average person realizes. If this weren't true then how come the drug companies are making so much money. My Sister, works for Eli Lilly and makes $90,000 per year! Currently here in Vanderburgh County the Suicide rate is above the national average in this year alone. Mostly kids & young adults. Oh I know it! I have just quit smoking again this year, and have had several doctors in the past offer and almost insist I go on wellbutrin, as one of the side effects is a lessening of the nicotine cravings . . . . I tried it the first time I quit, and it may or may not have helped, but it made me an emotional zombie! About 2 months into that I said whoa.....no way. I think prescription drugs are one of the biggest cons going in America myself, and I also have a neice who as a salesman for Pfizers. My sweety has seen a couple of specialists in trying to find out what is causing her neck and back pain. One very expensive nincompoop immediately diagnosed her as 'severely depressed' when she asked if she had lost a family member recently, and she confirmed she had lost her mother a couple of years back. When she explained she had done her own research online and felt she had a sytemic infection, the dope bristled, told her she had no idea what she was talking about, and tried to give her an anti depressant prescription anyway. I think they should legalize dope, and make the LEGAL MIND NUMBING stuff ILLEGAL myself. I have done my share of drugs and drinking in my youth, and can say with 100% conviction that I would rather walk into a room with 50 stoned people, than a room with 5 drunks. I have never seen anyone become violent from smoking too much pot, while I can verify I have seen booze turn the most meek, timid and mild people of bot sexes into spitting, hissing maniacs ready to rip your face off more times than I care to remember. oops, sort of off topic ain't we. . .
|
|
|
Post by drgreyhound on Apr 20, 2007 5:16:11 GMT -5
My sweety has seen a couple of specialists in trying to find out what is causing her neck and back pain. One very expensive nincompoop immediately diagnosed her as 'severely depressed' when she asked if she had lost a family member recently, and she confirmed she had lost her mother a couple of years back. When she explained she had done her own research online and felt she had a sytemic infection, the dope bristled, told her she had no idea what she was talking about, and tried to give her an anti depressant prescription anyway. There is a whole class of psychological disorders in which symptoms are expressed almost exclusively through somatic, or bodily, complaints. Many times, these clients are very resistant to acknowledge feelings of depression; therefore, these strong emotions are expressed through the body, as they WILL come out some way if they are severe enough. I have to wonder if this is where the aforementioned "nincompoop" was coming from clinically, as therapy with or without antidepressant meds can really help these folks sometimes. I think it's important in any case to really consider the client's wishes in wanting to take meds or not--so it sounds as if this guy wasn't considering your wife's perspective nearly as much as he (she?) shoud have been.
|
|
|
Post by drgreyhound on Apr 20, 2007 5:22:32 GMT -5
Question? Isn't it illegal to sell a firearm to a person that has a documented mental disorder, or has HIPPA prevented this info from being included in background checks? ?? The only scenarios in which providers (at least mental health care providers) can break confidentiality as per HIPAA is where there is a clear threat (means, plan, etc.) that the person will harm themselves or a specific other party, or will abuse/is abusing a child, elder, or other party that can not defend themselves for some reason (such as those with certain disabilities). If a client's files are subpoenaed by a court of law, we are legally obligated to turn over the file and break confidentiality, although some providers choose not to do this because they don't want to break confidentiality and risk going to jail. Otherwise, we can not say anything, or even acknowledge that we see a particular client to someone who calls and asks about the client.
|
|
|
Post by drgreyhound on Apr 20, 2007 5:29:00 GMT -5
No way in heck 6 out of 10 kids are on Prozac. Maybe 6 out of 100 at best, and I doubt anyone can produce statistics to prove either. Not just "Prozac" but OTHER Psychological Drugs too are being prescribed way too often. They should always be prescribed with the client's wishes in mind--in some cases, they probably should have been prescribed when they were not, and in others, they probably weren't absolutely essential to the success of treatment. It can really help to correct neurotransmitter levels that get "out of whack" in some clients, so that they can learn skills in therapy while on the drug that they can use when they discharge from therapy and are ramped off the drug.
|
|
|
Post by Woody Williams on Apr 20, 2007 5:56:38 GMT -5
That is interesting drgreyhound.
In the cases of court ordered treatment it then becoems a matter of public record and that should keep someone from obtaining a gun legally .
A person that has went through some sort of mental treatment is supposed to state that on the application form to buy a gun.
If this guy didn't do that then this was an illegal buy.
|
|
|
Post by dbd870 on Apr 20, 2007 6:37:53 GMT -5
The way I understand it; he was not ordered into treatment so he wasn't excluded. I believe the question uses the word "adjudicated". Perhaps there's where a change needs to be looked at.
|
|
|
Post by Woody Williams on Apr 20, 2007 6:44:53 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by drgreyhound on Apr 20, 2007 6:47:53 GMT -5
That is interesting drgreyhound. In the cases of court ordered treatment it then becoems a matter of public record and that should keep someone from obtaining a gun legally . A person that has went through some sort of mental treatment is supposed to state that on the application form to buy a gun. If this guy didn't do that then this was an illegal buy. I have never bought a gun before, so I didn't know that listing any treatment for mental illness was part of the application. I would guess many people who have been diagnosed with some sort of serious mental illness would not disclose that information, while those who have a serious mental illness and have not been diagnosed with anything wouldn't think (or care) that they have such a diagnosis. Also, if someone is court-ordered to attend treatment, maybe it's just this fact alone that is public record, rather than the details of the treatment process and outcome that would dictate whether or not having access to a gun would be safe for that person. I do find it interesting that this individual was ordered to undergo an inpatient psych eval, was ruled a danger to himself, and was discharged from the facility with a referral to a counseling center, as if he'd actually consider going...sounds to me like this guy should not have been released from the facility until he was no longer a clear threat to himself or someone else, possibly documented in part by a signed contract not to commit suicide or homicide. Even though he would have done it if he had really wanted to, at least the facility would have been doing absolutely everything in its power to at least keep this guy contained and document their efforts to keep something like this from happening.
|
|
|
Post by drgreyhound on Apr 20, 2007 7:00:18 GMT -5
Hmm. Maybe if the law more clearly objectified "mental instability"? For example, if someone who has been diagnosed in the past with something common and usually very treatable such as an uncomplicated depressive or anxiety disorder, has been treated, and has been assessed as not being an immediate danger to themselves wants to buy a firearm for target practice or hunting, I don't see how having that disorder in the past and obtaining treatment for it should limit that person's ability to obtain a firearm. However, maybe someone who has been diagnosed with a more serious degree of mental illness or has demonstrated dangerous past behavior should not be allowed to purchase a firearm on that basis. And then there's those folks like the shooter, who I'm sure has a very severe complex of mental illnesses (probably even a personality disorder--or several!--unlikely to remit) and as a result have very low insight and judgment as to their illnesses or really anything else in their lives (with their insight and judgment certainly being so low that mental health treatment would not be sought, much less listing mental diagnoses or treatments on an application to purchase a firearm). Just a thought...
|
|
|
Post by dbd870 on Apr 20, 2007 7:42:59 GMT -5
What I was told is there are a couple of boxes the judge can check: 1 puts him in an institution, the other sends him off to explore other alternatives. The only one that prohibits him from purchase is the first option. Don't know if that's correct, but that is what a dealer told me. I agree there needs to be a change in the definition and manditory reporting.
|
|
|
Post by JohnSmiles on Apr 20, 2007 15:43:15 GMT -5
My sweety has seen a couple of specialists in trying to find out what is causing her neck and back pain. One very expensive nincompoop immediately diagnosed her as 'severely depressed' when she asked if she had lost a family member recently, and she confirmed she had lost her mother a couple of years back. When she explained she had done her own research online and felt she had a systemic infection, the dope bristled, told her she had no idea what she was talking about, and tried to give her an anti depressant prescription anyway. There is a whole class of psychological disorders in which symptoms are expressed almost exclusively through somatic, or bodily, complaints. Many times, these clients are very resistant to acknowledge feelings of depression; therefore, these strong emotions are expressed through the body, as they WILL come out some way if they are severe enough. I have to wonder if this is where the aforementioned "nincompoop" was coming from clinically, as therapy with or without antidepressant meds can really help these folks sometimes. I think it's important in any case to really consider the client's wishes in wanting to take meds or not--so it sounds as if this guy wasn't considering your wife's perspective nearly as much as he (she?) shoud have been. Just an extremely overpaid idiot not interested in curing anything at all, but only getting her next bill sent to another patient. She was billed for a 90 minute exam, and was in and out in under 20 minutes. After a few very vocal phone calls, and a letter stating this would be her last correspondence to her office before seeking legal counsel, the bill was canceled.
|
|
|
Post by drgreyhound on Apr 20, 2007 16:14:05 GMT -5
This is actually unethical, and can involve being charged with insurance fraud as well. No wonder she dropped the charges the minute you mentioned legal counsel...
|
|
|
Post by JohnSmiles on Apr 20, 2007 17:14:45 GMT -5
This is actually unethical, and can involve being charged with insurance fraud as well. No wonder she dropped the charges the minute you mentioned legal counsel... Yeah, up until she sent that last letter, they were 100% adamant about the bill.
|
|
|
Post by Russ Koon on Apr 21, 2007 9:15:45 GMT -5
WRT to the purchase of firearms when the application has been checked to show a former mental problem......my brother was once diagnosed with severe depression, many years ago, and when he tried to buy a ML rifle to go elk hunting a few years ago he was refused by the salesperson at WalMart because he had answered truthfully on the application. Even though the state didn't require the application to be completed for the purchase of a ML, which could have been mail-ordered, and the depression has long since been gone, there was no convincing the clerk to sell the gun.
I think that's the situation that many will face in trying to buy a weapon. The sellers will tend to err on the side of caution in making a sale that could possibly have any repercussions. Better to miss one sale than to bring the BATF down on the shop, so they'll reject even those who should be legal if there's the slightest abnormality in the app.
Of course in real life, the entire process even when working as intended only means that the buyer will be inconvenienced by needing to make his purchase on the street corner like the teenyboppers do when they buy their dope. It won't deter the maniac who intends on using the weapon for a felony, but it will limit the ability of someone who needs it for self-defense or wants to go hunting, but who doesn't want to risk becoming a felon by the purchase.
|
|