<p>Call me crazy, but I really don’t see what guns or swimming pools have to do with health care. </p>
<p>If you meet a new patient, clearly depressed, you may want to explore how suicidal, if he/she has a means. You take that into consideration when prescribing meds, or asking about a gun. It’s normal to ask if they have thoughts of hurting themselves or others, and making a note of his/her replies. If patient is taking a lot of strong pain med.s, seems appropriate to ask if they are still driving and if they have had accidents. (I don’t mean to suggest one wouldn’t explore these topics with any new patient, but a professional would spend more time in exploration depending on the answers provided.)</p>
<p>Yes, the state rules vary widely from mandatory reporting to no reporting requirement by physicians and other healthcare providers. Would help if there was some consistency across states, but alas that will not happen. Same for the rules re: mandatory child or elder abuse reporting.</p>
<p>**ETA Here is a good article. PA has strict reporting regulations. Others, like Montana, are very permissive. Some have no guidelines. <a href=“Physicians' Legal Responsibility to Report Impaired Drivers | Journal of Ethics | American Medical Association”>http://virtualmentor.ama-assn.org/2008/06/hlaw1-0806.html</a> </p>
<p>The pediatrician my mom took me to as a child had a doctor partner who lost his own child in a backyard pool drowning at his home. My pediatrician made a big deal every visit to his office asking parents if they had a pool and he would advise safety stuff to the parents. I got swimming lessons beginning at age 3! Every week in Florida kids drown in backyard pools because of negligence and inadequate safety precautions that could have prevented needless deaths of children.</p>
<p>Pools are somewhat a big deal in Florida, especially once the kids are out of school. I know some HOAs, mine included, require additional fencing/safety precautions/fines depending on your type and whether you have it filled or not. </p>
<p>Well, I don’t think we want to make pediatricians responsible for swimming pool accidents, do we? Not at all saying helpful advice isn’t nice but the implications are along the lines of “slippery slope.” imho. </p>
<p>The mission of the American Academy of Pediatrics is to attain optimal physical, mental, and social health and well-being for all infants, children, adolescents, and young adults.</p>
<p>Next time flying into an airport in Florida, look out the plane’s window and see how many swimming pools are in backyards. Pediatricians in Florida aren’t legally required to talk up water safety, but I think ethically they should considering the number of drownings that occur in Florida and that could be avoided with better water safety practices by parents who have backyard pools.</p>
<p><a href=“http://www.news-press.com/article/20140203/MOMS/302030018/Parenting-Drowning-prevention-ramps-up”>http://www.news-press.com/article/20140203/MOMS/302030018/Parenting-Drowning-prevention-ramps-up</a></p>
<p>Well, I’m not disputing that drowning is a problem, just not sure it’s a medical problem. I say this as the mom of a lifeguard and an EMT who has raised kids with a swimming pool and H works in the industry so it’s not as though I’m unfamiliar with the potential dangers. Should doctors be required to warn us about car crashes and the fire dangers of fragrant candles, as well? And, be legally responsible if we fail to follow the advice, which is unfortunately what usually happens anyway.</p>
<p>I had both of my kids have swimming lessons from the time they were 3 as well. All of my nieces and nephews can also swim. There are tons of pools and bodies of water in HI. Sadly, there are many drowning so as well. When my kids were in preschool and invited to any party or house, I always asked if water would be present and always insisted on being present, to keep an eye on my youngsters. They attended many gatherings with pools and other bodies of water all their lives. We have gotten a few kids out of the water when they might have otherwise not survived as no one else noticed they had gone underwater and not re-emerged. </p>
<p>IMHO–All people should be taught to swim as a key survival item before they turn 5. Folks should never swim or be in water alone–someone else should always be around. </p>
<p>Regarding the Dunn case, it is my understanding that premeditation was necessary to fin him guilty of 1st degree murder, and it seems fairly clear that this was not premeditated. Again according to my understanding, he was not actually charged with second degree murder, which would probably have been a slam dunk. </p>
<p>It would appear to be a problem with the charges, rather than with the jury.</p>
<p>In any case, is he not looking at 60 years or more?</p>
<p>except that there is no time requirement in Florida for premeditation. whether you agree with that or not the jurors were permitted to recognize that Dunn made a decision to shoot. </p>
<p>Mr. Dunn, who was visiting from out of town, left the scene and did not call 911 or the police after the shooting. Instead, he returned to his hotel, and the next morning drove two and a half hours to his home in Brevard County. The prosecutors said his behavior did not jibe with the actions of a man who had fired in self-defense. They also argued that Mr. Dunn had had enough time to reflect before shooting, which was why they accused him of premeditated murder
<a href=“Jury Reaches Partial Verdict in Florida Killing Over Loud Music - The New York Times”>Jury Reaches Partial Verdict in Florida Killing Over Loud Music - The New York Times;
<p>As a Floridian I personally am disgusted by this outcome. </p>
<p>Autopsy info</p>
<p>"The bullet fired into the chest of the man who died inside a Wesley Chapel movie theater last month also grazed his right hand, indicating the victim might have raised it at the moment he was shot, according to the autopsy report released Wednesday.</p>
<p>“The paths of the two gunshot wounds correspond when the right hand/wrist is held in front of the thorax and likely represent the path of a single bullet,” noted chief medical examiner Jon Thogmartin, whose staff examined the body of Oulson, 43. The report also mentions unburned powder and debris found on the back of Oulson’s right hand.</p>
<p>The autopsy report appears to corroborate an enhanced surveillance video taken from inside auditorium 10, where the shooting took place. In the video, Reeves leans forward in his seat, then Oulson’s hand extends across the chair, just barely entering the video clip, and dumps something in Reeves’ lap. (Witnesses say they saw Oulson throw popcorn at Reeves.) ** Without pause, ** Reeves reaches his right hand forward and fires, the muzzle flash bursting outside the camera’s frame.</p>
<p>Witnesses in the dimly lit theater said they heard words exchanged but did not see any physical contact between the two men. But Reeves told sheriff’s detectives shortly after the shooting that something struck him in the face, knocking his glasses crooked. His legal team has said he acted in self defense.</p>
<p>The autopsy report also says Oulson was shot in the left side of his chest, with the bullet perforating the fourth left rib and piercing his heart. Examiners removed a yellow metal bullet jacket from the base of his heart and a lead fragment from his right lung."</p>
<p><a href=“Autopsy report indicates movie theater shooting victim raised his hand before gun was fired”>http://www.tampabay.com/news/courts/criminal/autopsy-report-indicates-movie-theater-shooting-victim-raised-his-hand/2165334</a></p>
<p>The article also notes the “without pause” (emphasis added). That seems to be what we’ve noticed. there doesn’t seem to be any pause at all between the popcorn and the shot. Reeves must have had that gun in his lap or something to be able to grab and fire that quickly from a sitting position. </p>
<p>I don’t know if legally there’s any point to make about Reeves being purposely aggressive/annoying because he knew he had a gun as “back up”. If so, that would seem to me to discount the self-defense claim. Otherwise, concealed weapon people could walk around taunting people in hopes of egging on an altercation just so they can then shoot them dead.</p>
<p>Regarding the Dunn case, it’s important to keep in mind 3 basics:</p>
<ol>
<li><p>The jury heard nothing about his actual character. The prosecution couldn’t put on evidence of his history of domestic abuse, his demonstrated racism, his violent character or more salacious details. It’s a hole in the law, a huge historic mess, that evidence exculpating a person can be entered even if it’s nothing more than character assassination of witnesses and victims but evidence that presents the full, actual character of a defendant can not. We are required to judge based on the act as presented and whatever the defense chooses to present about the person. So the jury saw a sanitized version of a man who came from a wedding, not the real picture.</p></li>
<li><p>White shooter, young black male victim. Best case for defense. Even minority jurors recognize that young minority males can seem threatening. And that connects with …</p></li>
<li><p>The defense rightly picked on and picked at the pure self-defense argument, that he saw a gun and fired and there was a gun because the victims drove around for something like 3 minutes and got rid of it and the police never looked. Since prosecutors couldn’t introduce evidence of the shooter’s actual character, it was essentially his testimony that he saw a gun and then intimations by the defense that there might have been one. That can be reasonable doubt.</p></li>
</ol>
<p>So they found him guilty because he kept firing after the car pulled away. Rational verdict. Juries generally do rational things. Not the correct verdict if you know the shooter’s actual character, but that’s the way the system is stacked.</p>
<p>I again don’t see this as a “stand your ground” case because the shooter claims he saw a gun pointed at him. </p>
<p>If anyone has a boatload of free time on their hands to read/listen/view through all this stuff, here is a list of the photos, audio of interviews (some redacted) video camera shots, autopsy report, etc related to this case. <a href=“State of Florida vs Curtis Reeves”>http://www.curtisreevestrial.com/other.asp</a></p>
<p>No one read/listened to/viewed these transcripts?</p>
<p>I looked at some of them. It seems like there is no new information, and the time counter on the tape still skips five seconds at a critical time. Not likely that anything could have happened there, but its a potential issue for a trial, if one happens. The written statements from the witnesses are pretty cryptic. One wonders if only three people were able to give a statement. It looks that way. </p>
<p>They explained the 5 seconds missing. They said there was no movement during that time so the camera wasnt recording. Nothing redacted. So they say…</p>
<p>I listened to the interviews with the wives. </p>
<p>Report, please!!</p>