http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=17915
![]()
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:
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."
Julie Foster
is a staff reporter for WorldNetDaily.
ALL
INFORMATION, DATA, AND MATERIAL CONTAINED, PRESENTED, OR PROVIDED HERE IS FOR
GENERAL INFORMATION PURPOSES ONLY AND IS NOT TO BE CONSTRUED AS REFLECTING THE
KNOWLEDGE OR OPINIONS OF THE PUBLISHER, AND IS NOT TO BE CONSTRUED OR INTENDED
AS PROVIDING MEDICAL OR LEGAL ADVICE. THE DECISION WHETHER OR NOT TO
VACCINATE IS AN IMPORTANT AND COMPLEX ISSUE AND SHOULD BE MADE BY YOU, AND YOU
ALONE, IN CONSULTATION WITH YOUR HEALTH CARE PROVIDER.