I’ve heard HIPAA laws are a major stumbling block with regard to government entities looking into a person’s background when trying to determine if that person should or should not be allowed to purchase/own a firearm.
True?
No. You can give permission to government entities to look at your medical history if that is required to own a gun.
Just curious, where did you hear this?
The HIPAA Privacy Rule establishes national standards to protect individuals’ medical records and other individually identifiable health information (collectively defined as “protected health information”) and applies to health plans, health care clearinghouses, and those health care providers that conduct certain health care transactions electronically. The Rule requires appropriate safeguards to protect the privacy of protected health information and sets limits and conditions on the uses and disclosures that may be made of such information without an individual’s authorization. The Rule also gives individuals rights over their protected health information, including rights to examine and obtain a copy of their health records, to direct a covered entity to transmit to a third party an electronic copy of their protected health information in an electronic health record, and to request corrections.
The page to which @Duckster linked contains a number of PDFs, which have clarifications and modifications to the HIPAA law. A 2016 PDF (the fourth one on the list) specifies a change to the law – from that PDF:
If I’m reading that accurately (I may not be), then HIPAA already allows for that disclosure in the case of purchasing a firearm – I am guessing that this is whether or not the person in question has agreed to the disclosure.
I think this article is a bit more specific to the OP’s question rather than the general HIPAA law, or the amplification that @kenobi_65 posted.
A snip that addresses the OP directly (and clears up what kenobi was talking about)
NICS is the federal database that stores information about individuals prohibited by law from possessing firearms. Those include felons, those convicted of domestic violence and individuals involuntarily committed to a mental institution or found to be a danger to themselves or others, or unable to manage their affairs due to a mental health condition, according to HHS.
Italics mine. So the issue isn’t so much with the reporting, but that the issues that determine ineligibility are pretty damn narrow and imply severe mental illness in general, rather than a more widely defined risk.
So remember kids, seek help responsibly and assist the mental healthcare provider by being fully honest when they ask about idealization of self-harm, even if it results in getting yourself packed away for 72 hours. You’ll never be allowed to buy a gun, unlike those irresponsible balls of white-hot rage who can buy guns.
never mind
People say.
Oh, them. Should have figured.
Moderator Note
Do not make politically charged statements like this in FQ. If you want to engage in gun debate rhetoric, do so in one of the gun debate threads. If you want to go on a Pit-style rang against pro-gun folks, do so in the Pit. Stick to the facts in FQ.