Quote:
Originally Posted by BigRedBeta
It's certainly a very touchy subject given the recent shootings across the country.
Medically, I'm not sure that it's up to doctors to make the decision on whether or not people can have guns. If the law states that those with diagnosed mental illnesses aren't allowed to possess firearms then that's the consequence of having a mental illness, but doctors should focus on disease and health. This isn't to say that doctors must ignore social issues with their patients, but that I think that's more of a one way street - doctors focus on social issues that affect the health of their patient (ie domestic abuse, inability to pay for meds, difficulty patients have getting to appointments b/c they don't have transportation), but shouldn't worry about how the health decisions affect the social issues in their patients. That's a very simplified view for sure, going with the one way street analogy, and I'm sure that if I thought about it, I'd be able to come up with some situations in which I don't agree with what I've just said, but on first glance, that looks like a good starting point. I probably didn't explain it that very well though...
Of course I'm of the opinion that we'd be better off with out the 2nd Amendment, but recognize it's not that easy...
|
You bring up a relevant medical situation. In no way should a physician make that decision. But the diagnosis of any mental illness starts at the doctors office or worse yet, the psychiatric ward. Making it well within the realm of medical doctors to have a very strong comment about the issuance of guns.
The problem is people who have traumatic experiences, like some PTSD, who need medications to ease their difficulties.
Unfortunately, very few mental illnesses are actually treated by any medication given and the 2-pronged treatment is not followed through, like bipolar 2 with lithium treatment then talk therapy, preferably cognitive therapy. And let's not get into stress management...