Bumping this old thread for a belated update: Florida officials are indeed appealing the decision. Announced last month. My guess is that they waited that long so that the case would not come up until after the election.
Look’s like the Guv is mounting his trusty stead “Delusional” and begin the long-term journey of tilting at the windmills of SCOTUS.
Thought the conservative position was that other people shouldn’t pass judgement on any contract agreed upon by mutually consenting agents - especially not the state?
Say 1/5th of the totals in this guy’s shop are due to people hanging out of the driver’s window spraying their AK-47 everywhere. Then does it become pertinent to ask what you plan to do with the gun in your passenger’s seat?
Or how about say we all jump on the hyperbole express and ride this one right off the rails?
Restricting the doctors right to asked damned impertinent questions, or indeed the patients right to to reply with massive levels of bullshit, challenges the very foundation of the doctor/patient relationship.
Another update.
Dangerous precedent.
Before you know it, there’ll be executive action to allow physicians to talk to their patients about abortion in any manner they choose.
Or ask parents of toddlers where they store the bleach, ammonia, and oven cleaner in their home. Along, perhaps, with a suggestion that “On the floor in the corner of the kitchen” might not be the best possible answer.
You see CannyDan, doctors don’t really know about cleaning products. Some could not even tell you whether Bon Ami is abrasive or not or which products should not ever be mixed with which other ones. Say flax soap and they think omega three fatty acids! What would possibly give them any expertise to discuss cleaning products with people who actually own and use them? How dare they impose their political agenda that oven cleaner should stored in a locked cabinet out of toddler reach on those who feel that they need their oven cleaner at the ready for any emergent baked on spill especially when many of them never even use these products themselves?
I wonder when the appeal is being heard. Obviously the mood of the country is a bit different now then when the law was first proposed and I wonder if the NRA’s steadfast support of this doctor gag law (which will get more press when the case comes up) will end up forcing some of their usual political allies to further distance themselves. Or not.
I admit to having not taken the time to read through the thread yet, but I just wanted to comfort you a bit. Consider yourself lucky that you aren’t an Ob-Gyn in Indiana, where you would be forced to actually outright lie to your patients … by law. Or an Ob-Gyn in South Dakota, where you’d be forced to outright lie to your patients there, too. … also by law.
These fuckers are sick and we have to beat them back into the caves where they belong. … metaphorically (before I’m accused of wishing actual physical harm on anyone).
Have you perchance noticed what we are presently using as a governor here? Sanity isn’t exactly the long suit of our politicians. Nor of much of the electorate, for that matter. <sigh> Smart money is on “Or not.”
I was thinking more national stage. When this goes to trial on appeal it will get some national press. And your governor is not likely to drop it before it does.
Bumping Yee olde thread
Yet another twist in the “Glocks vs Docs” saga.
“Hey, we’re not restricting your free speech rights by not allowing you to talk about governmental corruption, Mr. Civil Service Employee! We’re just regulating your professional conduct!”
:dubious:
“The SCOTUS ruled today that there is nothing unconstitutional about Nescienta’s state law that prohibits scientists and engineers from talking about gravity, the speed of light or thermodynamics, saying that the law was fine because all it was really doing was regulating professional conduct.”
:dubious:
Did we have a GD thread going about this a few years ago, or do we need to start one now that it’s crossed over the border from Nescienta into Crazyland?
Well we had one in the Pit about a year and a half ago. :rolleyes:
I suspect that this will now be taken higher.
For now the injunction remains in place until it is determined if/when such will occur.
Actually U.S. Circuit Judge Gerald Tjoflat had it somewhat right: this law does declare what constitutes good medical care with the state declaring that what doctors and their societies have decided is such based on their expert opinions is immaterial. That however is not such a simple thing. It is goddamn scary thing. Next they tell me if I can ask about soda or fast food or television watching habits or car seats?
So Florida doctors have no right to talk to their patients about guns, but strangers have a right to talk to women about abortions whether they want to hear it or not?
That would appear to be true.
Of course, the government can regulate professional conduct in a way that they cannot regulate a private citizen’s conduct.
Still, I am torn. I recognize that this law is massively outrageous overreach and violative of good sense as well as First Amendment rights, because a balancing of the First Amendment interest here shows the law is over breadth to accomplish any legitimate government interest.
So I oppose the law.
But at the same time, it delights me to see various liberal contortions that let them assert this law is improper, but pharmacists can still be forced to sell abortion-inducing medication.
In my view, an honest application of principles would recognize that you can’t favor the power of government to do one without the other.
I absolutely agree that doctors should be free to ask what they please about guns, and patients should be free to seek another doctor. Notice that I don’t speculate about happens if the patient lives too far from another doctor or can only get around with public transportation. I accept that these things are part of the marketplace of health care.
Seems pretty clear to me. There’s a big difference between carrying out one’s professional duties to serve the needs of one’s patients versus carrying out one’s personal religious beliefs to the detriment of one’s customers.
Professional duties and professional judgment are not the same as religious beliefs. If I am working with a depressed person and I ask if they have firearms at home, do you think it is because of my religious beliefs?
What’s to contort?
Maybe because doctors are authority figures. What they say to their patients carries a lot more weight than what a random person out there says. So they should limit what they say to health matters.