Calling all Shrinks. Do you guys HAVE to report patient care or not?

[HHollow]

My mother is married to a psychiatrist and through this connection I have been told that it is OPTIONAL for psychiatrists to do the necessary reporting so that their lunatic patients can not buy firearms. [any shrinks out there please verify?!] According to Ma, there is merely a $4500 fine (or tax or charge) for not reporting. It appears that there is a community of shrinks out there that feel that paying the $4500 is better than violating some doc-patient confidentiality.

So most of us here agree that guns are ok, crazies with guns are not ok. And when we buy are beloved guns we have to go through the 4473 check to make sure we are not on the crazy list. There have been a couple of shootings in the news where the shooter was known to be imbalanced but was able to legally pass the background check.

The worst of it is that the shrink in question is a card carrying NRA member and definitely no FUDD. It turns out that he is so afraid of his patients that he always carries.

 

[87iroc]

 

[churchmouse]

My mother is married to a psychiatrist and through this connection I have been told that it is OPTIONAL for psychiatrists to do the necessary reporting so that their lunatic patients can not buy firearms. [any shrinks out there please verify?!] According to Ma, there is merely a $4500 fine (or tax or charge) for not reporting. It appears that there is a community of shrinks out there that feel that paying the $4500 is better than violating some doc-patient confidentiality.

So most of us here agree that guns are ok, crazies with guns are not ok. And when we buy are beloved guns we have to go through the 4473 check to make sure we are not on the crazy list. There have been a couple of shootings in the news where the shooter was known to be imbalanced but was able to legally pass the background check.

The worst of it is that the shrink in question is a car carrying NRA member and definitely no FUDD. It turns out that he is so afraid of his patients that he always carries.

More than just a few incidents. More than just a few.

 

[KUJO2388]

Very interesting discussion will be had here.

 

[HHollow]

It just does not seem to be right that reporting would merely be optional. I would think that the shrink would/should be liable if one of his un-reported patients did anything dirty with a firearm.

 

[KUJO2388]

People will not seek help if the help will tell on them.

 

[Bennettjh]

 

[churchmouse]

People will not seek help if the help will tell on them.

If one of these addled minds attempts to legally get a gun to carry out some sordid affair and is refused for being an addled mind even a nut will know who ratted them out. These "Dr's" () then are in fear for their lives....catch 22

 

[possum_128]

He must be strong to be able to carry a car.

 

[gcoop]

I wonder what the co-pay of that office visit is?

 

[Captain Bligh]

I am a licensed therapist in practice for over 30 years. I am not required to make any report related to firearm purchases. However, there are certain circumstances in which confidentiality shall be breached according to mandatory reporting statutes. The big three all have to do with harm or potential harm: child abuse, suicide, or threat to harm a third person. In the case of the latter, if a practitioner has reason to believe her/his patient poses a risk to a third person, we have a duty to warn that person or take other measures as necessary to keep the potential victim safe. (See Tarasoff vs. The Regents of The University of California).

I have only been involved in one firearm related matter in my career having to do with a patient who had firearms confiscated by LEO after an incident. The PD wanted a statement from me that the patient posed no risk before returning his firearms.

 

[Cygnus]

I am a licensed therapist in practice for over 30 years. I am not required to make any report related to firearm purchases. However, there are certain circumstances in which confidentiality shall be breached according to mandatory reporting statutes. The big three all have to do with harm or potential harm: child abuse, suicide, or threat to harm a third person. In the case of the latter, if a practitioner has reason to believe her/his patient poses a risk to a third person, we have a duty to warn that person or take other measures as necessary to keep the potential victim safe. (See Tarasoff vs. The Regents of The University of California).

I have only been involved in one firearm related matter in my career having to do with a patient who had firearms confiscated by LEO after an incident. The PD wanted a statement from me that the patient posed no risk before returning his firearms.

You nailed it. Tsarrisoff Warning. We have to warn people that we have to report. Kinda weird. Anyway, I had always thought that when this question comes up that anyhting that would fit Tarasoff criteria would also fit the NICS criteria. I would have thought thta law enforcement would take it from their once w made it know,. Same for adjudicated mentally incometent or involuntary stays.
IANAL. ( I am a lowly masters level clincian. Althoguh licecnsed in a few places). I have never heard of the fine. Although the OP said psychiatrists so maybe just the physicians with the specialty....?

 

[KittySlayer]

People will not seek help if the help will tell on them.

Agree, have to be careful what you wish for. Worse than not reporting is someone in need not getting care and then going on a killing spree. A tough balance.

 

[KLB]

I am a licensed therapist in practice for over 30 years. I am not required to make any report related to firearm purchases. However, there are certain circumstances in which confidentiality shall be breached according to mandatory reporting statutes. The big three all have to do with harm or potential harm: child abuse, suicide, or threat to harm a third person. In the case of the latter, if a practitioner has reason to believe her/his patient poses a risk to a third person, we have a duty to warn that person or take other measures as necessary to keep the potential victim safe. (See Tarasoff vs. The Regents of The University of California).

I have only been involved in one firearm related matter in my career having to do with a patient who had firearms confiscated by LEO after an incident. The PD wanted a statement from me that the patient posed no risk before returning his firearms.

You nailed it. Tsarrisoff Warning. We have to warn people that we have to report. Kinda weird. Anyway, I had always thought that when this question comes up that anyhting that would fit Tarasoff criteria would also fit the NICS criteria. I would have thought thta law enforcement would take it from their once w made it know,. Same for adjudicated mentally incometent or involuntary stays.
IANAL. ( I am a lowly masters level clincian. Althoguh licecnsed in a few places). I have never heard of the fine. Although the OP said psychiatrists so maybe just the physicians with the specialty....?

Who do you tell? The police?

 

[HoughMade]

1) If you are fined for not reporting, reporting is not voluntary.

2) As for the fine, that is a vast oversimplification. Failure to report when statutes or professional practice guidelines require it can result in fines, sure, but also license discipline up to and including license revocation.

3) Tarasoff itself said that a provider has a duty to warn an identifiable target of a real, imminent threat. That duty could be fulfilled in several ways, but the duty is to warn the target, or at least make sure the target is warned.

4) Tarasoff was about civil liability for a failure to warn so any mental healthcare provider should know that not only license discipline is possible for failing to report, but civil liability. Note that Tarasoff is binding California law and has not been adopted everywhere, but it is prudent to assume that over time it will become law pretty much everywhere.

 

[Spear Dane]

I am a licensed therapist in practice for over 30 years. The PD wanted a statement from me that the patient posed no risk before returning his firearms.

I am curious. Assuming you gave the ok, for what period of time are you on the hook for clearing a patient? Say s/he commits a gun crime 3 weeks later, ok you obviously screwed the pooch. But what about 5 years down the road?

 

[Cygnus]

Who do you tell? The police?

Yes. As well as the intended target.

Look up the Tarrasoff v California.( I think that is the other party in the case) It will explain a lot. Some of this varies by state. As far as reporting or NCIS, etc. I have never been asked about this nor do I know the mechanism. Like i said earlier, I always figured that if I had to contact law enfocement, that law enforcement ( in whatever form) would take from there.
Perhaps no one set that up incertain staes......?

 

[Captain Bligh]

I am curious. Assuming you gave the ok, for what period of time are you on the hook for clearing a patient? Say s/he commits a gun crime 3 weeks later, ok you obviously screwed the pooch. But what about 5 years down the road?

I did not give the okay. I do not know the answer to your question.