When pediatricians
become politicians
Doctors rebuke, reject patients
over gun control, other issues.
By Julie Foster
© 2000 WorldNetDaily.com
William Edwards thought he was taking his 12-year-old son Matt for a routine physical examination required for the boy to attend camp.
But he was put off by a series of questions by pediatrician Dr. Thomas F. Long of the San Ramon Valley Primary Care Medical Group in California.
According to Edwards, Dr. Long asked his son what kinds of movies he watched at home, what he had for dinner the night before his visit and if his friends' families had guns in the house. The doctor also noted that Matt had not received a Hepatitis B immunization.
Edwards explained his reservations about the shot, saying the effects of the treatment on children are largely unknown. Upon being offered supportive information on the immunization published by the American Academy of Pediatrics, Edwards said the AAP was "the fox guarding the hen house."
That was the end of Dr. Long's physician relationship with the Edwards family. In a letter notifying the Edwardses that he would be discontinuing care for their son, Dr. Long said the father's statement "suggests a discontent for standard preventative health care measures which compromises our ability to provide satisfactory pediatric care for your family. We cannot practice pediatrics in this manner."
"We can no longer provide medical care for your family," Long wrote. Included with the letter was a release of medical records to allow a transfer of records to another physician. "In the interim, but for no more than 30 days, we will provide emergency care only should the need arise."
While it might surprise the public that a doctor would reject a patient over disagreement on social, political and personal issues, a group of petiatricians is condoning such selectivity.
Long is a member of the American Academy of Pediatrics, an organization of physicians whose mission is "to attain optimal physical, mental and social health and well-being for all infants, children, adolescents and young adults," according to the group's website. "To this purpose, the AAP and its members dedicate their efforts and resources."
The AAP's publication, "The Role of the Pediatrician in Youth Violence Prevention in Clinical Practice," outlines specific measures to be taken by pediatricians in violence prevention, including advocacy of gun-control proposals.
According to the academy, the publication "establishes an agenda for making this a routine part of pediatric practice in four major areas: clinical services, community advocacy, research, and education. This broad agenda builds on a still-evolving body of knowledge, but the urgency of youth violence prevention requires further and immediate action by pediatricians."
"Because many pediatricians encounter children and youth who are experiencing or are at risk for violence, pediatricians are well situated to intervene," states the document. "Prevention of youth violence requires that pediatricians recognize violence-related risk factors and diagnose and treat violence-related problems at all stages of child development."
Among the screening criteria listed in the report to identify "risk factors for violence among their patients" are:
"family stresses that could lead to violence (e.g., unemployment, divorce, or death);
appropriate supervision and care and support systems (e.g., child care arrangements, the family and social network);
disciplinary attitudes and practices of the parents or caregivers (particularly about corporal punishment and physical/emotional abuse);
exposure to violence in the home (domestic violence or child abuse), school, or community;
degree of exposure to media violence;
access to firearms (especially handguns) in their or a neighbor's home, or the community."
Released in January 1999, the report has come under scrutiny recently in California where a state legislator attempted to codify its screening provisions. Purportedly seeking a means for early identification of mental disabilities requiring special education, Assemblyman Darrell Steinberg, D-Sacramento, introduced Assembly Bill 2068, which, until last week, outlined various criteria for mental health evaluations.
California Assemblyman Darrell Steinberg, D-Sacramento, attempted to codify the AAP violence prevention report.
The first criterion listed was "a health and development history, including recommendations set forth in policy paper No. 'RE9832,' of the American Academy of Pediatrics, dated January 1999."
Steinberg's bill was amended to remove the AAP provision, and now requires physicians to notify parents when children may qualify for special education or other mental health services. In addition, the bill suggests "a panel of experts" convene under the auspices of the University of California to develop screening criteria for mental health evaluations.
Rusty Selix, executive director of the Mental Health Association in California -- an organization in support of the bill, told WorldNetDaily the bill was never intended to assess risk factors for violence.
"That's not what we were doing," Selix said. "No one would read it that way, but we can see how someone would take it that way."
Risk factors for violence are important, he said, but they are not to be part of this particular bill.
However, violence risk factors are the primary subject of the AAP publication. In fact, it outlines various positions for which pediatricians should advocate, including, "elimination of corporal punishment as a recommended form of child discipline in all settings" and "reduced availability or elimination of handguns in all communities through handgun regulation and public education."
Dr. Jack Swanson, chairman of the AAP's Committee on Practice and Ambulatory Medicine, told WND, "Immunization and violence prevention, and especially gun safety, are now probably the two biggest preventative health measures for children."
Saying "guns" are the second- and third-leading causes of death for children older than 1 year, Swanson acknowledged that gun safety measures are a priority for the organization.
"Certainly the academy doesn't have any standard that physicians need to have their patient adhere to before they provide care for them," he said.
Regarding Long's discharge of Matt Edwards, Swanson explained, "A physician should be comfortable with the family, and each physician has their own level of trust in the patient-physician relationship. Certainly, a child is put in the middle of this," he stated, emphasizing that parent-physician disagreements should be handled on a case-by-case basis.
"Pediatrics is all about supervising health care and providing anticipatory guidance to help children grow and mature physically, socially and safely," Long states in his letter. "Gun issues are important, and given recent national tragedies must be addressed with our youth. You have a different attitude about such matters."
The Edwardses were surprised by the doctor's decision.
Edwards told WorldNetDaily he was shocked by "the arrogance of the medical profession and that they know better than us how to raise our children."
"I'm concerned about privacy being whittled away," he said. "He's making the arrogant statement that I have contempt for what he thinks is proper and for what he thinks is good for my children versus what I think is best for my children."
"It's the parents' responsibility to make sure our children are educated regarding these issues," added Mrs. Edwards. "To me, it's a constitutional issue that they're taking away our rights."
"I'm just not going to tolerate it," she continued. "This comes down to society keeping tabs on children that they think will be a future problem. ... We should be able to object to certain treatments without being punished for it."
Long was out of his office on Tuesday and unavailable to comment.
Though Steinberg's bill no longer includes a reference to the AAP violence prevention report, the Edwardses are scheduled to testify today in a committee hearing of the bill.
"I'm concerned about government bureaucrats making laws about how parents should raise their children," Edwards said. "And I'm also concerned about doctors who make an assessment like this one about a parent who has six grandchildren. ... We've raised a good family."
-------
This is so...wrong that I don't even know were to start.
become politicians
Doctors rebuke, reject patients
over gun control, other issues.
By Julie Foster
© 2000 WorldNetDaily.com
William Edwards thought he was taking his 12-year-old son Matt for a routine physical examination required for the boy to attend camp.
But he was put off by a series of questions by pediatrician Dr. Thomas F. Long of the San Ramon Valley Primary Care Medical Group in California.
According to Edwards, Dr. Long asked his son what kinds of movies he watched at home, what he had for dinner the night before his visit and if his friends' families had guns in the house. The doctor also noted that Matt had not received a Hepatitis B immunization.
Edwards explained his reservations about the shot, saying the effects of the treatment on children are largely unknown. Upon being offered supportive information on the immunization published by the American Academy of Pediatrics, Edwards said the AAP was "the fox guarding the hen house."
That was the end of Dr. Long's physician relationship with the Edwards family. In a letter notifying the Edwardses that he would be discontinuing care for their son, Dr. Long said the father's statement "suggests a discontent for standard preventative health care measures which compromises our ability to provide satisfactory pediatric care for your family. We cannot practice pediatrics in this manner."
"We can no longer provide medical care for your family," Long wrote. Included with the letter was a release of medical records to allow a transfer of records to another physician. "In the interim, but for no more than 30 days, we will provide emergency care only should the need arise."
While it might surprise the public that a doctor would reject a patient over disagreement on social, political and personal issues, a group of petiatricians is condoning such selectivity.
Long is a member of the American Academy of Pediatrics, an organization of physicians whose mission is "to attain optimal physical, mental and social health and well-being for all infants, children, adolescents and young adults," according to the group's website. "To this purpose, the AAP and its members dedicate their efforts and resources."
The AAP's publication, "The Role of the Pediatrician in Youth Violence Prevention in Clinical Practice," outlines specific measures to be taken by pediatricians in violence prevention, including advocacy of gun-control proposals.
According to the academy, the publication "establishes an agenda for making this a routine part of pediatric practice in four major areas: clinical services, community advocacy, research, and education. This broad agenda builds on a still-evolving body of knowledge, but the urgency of youth violence prevention requires further and immediate action by pediatricians."
"Because many pediatricians encounter children and youth who are experiencing or are at risk for violence, pediatricians are well situated to intervene," states the document. "Prevention of youth violence requires that pediatricians recognize violence-related risk factors and diagnose and treat violence-related problems at all stages of child development."
Among the screening criteria listed in the report to identify "risk factors for violence among their patients" are:
"family stresses that could lead to violence (e.g., unemployment, divorce, or death);
appropriate supervision and care and support systems (e.g., child care arrangements, the family and social network);
disciplinary attitudes and practices of the parents or caregivers (particularly about corporal punishment and physical/emotional abuse);
exposure to violence in the home (domestic violence or child abuse), school, or community;
degree of exposure to media violence;
access to firearms (especially handguns) in their or a neighbor's home, or the community."
Released in January 1999, the report has come under scrutiny recently in California where a state legislator attempted to codify its screening provisions. Purportedly seeking a means for early identification of mental disabilities requiring special education, Assemblyman Darrell Steinberg, D-Sacramento, introduced Assembly Bill 2068, which, until last week, outlined various criteria for mental health evaluations.
California Assemblyman Darrell Steinberg, D-Sacramento, attempted to codify the AAP violence prevention report.
The first criterion listed was "a health and development history, including recommendations set forth in policy paper No. 'RE9832,' of the American Academy of Pediatrics, dated January 1999."
Steinberg's bill was amended to remove the AAP provision, and now requires physicians to notify parents when children may qualify for special education or other mental health services. In addition, the bill suggests "a panel of experts" convene under the auspices of the University of California to develop screening criteria for mental health evaluations.
Rusty Selix, executive director of the Mental Health Association in California -- an organization in support of the bill, told WorldNetDaily the bill was never intended to assess risk factors for violence.
"That's not what we were doing," Selix said. "No one would read it that way, but we can see how someone would take it that way."
Risk factors for violence are important, he said, but they are not to be part of this particular bill.
However, violence risk factors are the primary subject of the AAP publication. In fact, it outlines various positions for which pediatricians should advocate, including, "elimination of corporal punishment as a recommended form of child discipline in all settings" and "reduced availability or elimination of handguns in all communities through handgun regulation and public education."
Dr. Jack Swanson, chairman of the AAP's Committee on Practice and Ambulatory Medicine, told WND, "Immunization and violence prevention, and especially gun safety, are now probably the two biggest preventative health measures for children."
Saying "guns" are the second- and third-leading causes of death for children older than 1 year, Swanson acknowledged that gun safety measures are a priority for the organization.
"Certainly the academy doesn't have any standard that physicians need to have their patient adhere to before they provide care for them," he said.
Regarding Long's discharge of Matt Edwards, Swanson explained, "A physician should be comfortable with the family, and each physician has their own level of trust in the patient-physician relationship. Certainly, a child is put in the middle of this," he stated, emphasizing that parent-physician disagreements should be handled on a case-by-case basis.
"Pediatrics is all about supervising health care and providing anticipatory guidance to help children grow and mature physically, socially and safely," Long states in his letter. "Gun issues are important, and given recent national tragedies must be addressed with our youth. You have a different attitude about such matters."
The Edwardses were surprised by the doctor's decision.
Edwards told WorldNetDaily he was shocked by "the arrogance of the medical profession and that they know better than us how to raise our children."
"I'm concerned about privacy being whittled away," he said. "He's making the arrogant statement that I have contempt for what he thinks is proper and for what he thinks is good for my children versus what I think is best for my children."
"It's the parents' responsibility to make sure our children are educated regarding these issues," added Mrs. Edwards. "To me, it's a constitutional issue that they're taking away our rights."
"I'm just not going to tolerate it," she continued. "This comes down to society keeping tabs on children that they think will be a future problem. ... We should be able to object to certain treatments without being punished for it."
Long was out of his office on Tuesday and unavailable to comment.
Though Steinberg's bill no longer includes a reference to the AAP violence prevention report, the Edwardses are scheduled to testify today in a committee hearing of the bill.
"I'm concerned about government bureaucrats making laws about how parents should raise their children," Edwards said. "And I'm also concerned about doctors who make an assessment like this one about a parent who has six grandchildren. ... We've raised a good family."
-------
This is so...wrong that I don't even know were to start.