Odd question from Doctor

Originally posted by Swingarm
reply to post by MurderCityDevil

 

Sorry no, She has no place saying this. Tolerance is a deadly thing.

well i did say maybe, you are sternly saying

reply to post by MurderCityDevil


"some dr's are just that concerned and caring"

Non. They are not.

This doctor is likely to be following a new set of protocols given to him by Homeland Security or some other nefarious anti-terror division.

They get "treats" for being "just that concerned and caring"

Anyhow, Given the doctor shortage in Ontario; asking questions related to anything other than the patients health is completely detrimental to the healthcare system as a whole.

Imagining having to take the time to datamine my patients only forces me to imagine the amount of patients I could have helped in that wasted period of time.

This Soviet System sickens me.

Originally posted by TruthTellist
This doctor is likely to be following a new set of protocols given to him by Homeland Security or some other nefarious anti-terror division.

That's an startling allegation -- not altogether surprising, though; if banks and libraries can be made to snitch, why not doctors?

But I just did a google search, I couldn't find any news reports about DHS reporting requirements or protocols given to doctors.

Can you provide any more info or links? What are the specifics of these 'protocols'? Thanks!

reply to post by Ian McLean


The way they sell it to the doctors is similiar to what the drug companies do.

A representative (operative) will visit the doctor (normally at lunch) and begin telling them about the newest way the can contribute to their country.

They are reminded of the terrorist threat and given the latest information on how to detect or treat biological and chemical weapons and often given what is needed to treat their victims - all free.

After being told of the seriousness of the threat, they are given the chance to be able to prevent it and treat the effects. This is important stuff, and most doctors will take whatever opportunities they can to learn about new treatment methods and threats.

The doctor, after realizing just how serious the situation is will now be told of the various way in which they can prevent it. Preventative medicine is always preferable...

The doctor being now informed will then be assess by the operative who has been visiting with him; If he appears to be favourable to accepting the new data and medications etc., perhaps he will like to contribute to the effort in the Global War on terror?

It is only after this assessment is done that the doctor will be given the list of policies and laws that HE will now be able to enforce. He will be given the necessary portions of the Patriot Act(s) to justify his actions. He will be given a list of relevant presidential directives and other pertinent data that allows him to think he is doing the right thing.

In Canada the situation is somewhat different. However,If Bill C-51 (Codex Alimentarius-Lite) had passed, similar things would have begun to occur in Canada, where doctors are occasionally queried by CPS as to why they don't report as many cases of possible abuses - something I have experienced at several Practices.

Originally posted by TruthTellist

This doctor is likely to be following a new set of protocols given to him by Homeland Security or some other nefarious anti-terror division.

They get "treats" for being "just that concerned and caring"

Anyhow, Given the doctor shortage in Ontario; asking questions related to anything other than the patients health

how is gun safety and child proofing a house not related to childs health?

too many people are reading way too deep into this

to say dr's get treats for following protocol

i work in a clinic with dr's and know dr's that there is no conspiracy to tell people how to live, they are concerned about health

man, you people have no faith in anything anymore

It really is a 'standard' question. It's usually asked in tandem with other questions like- 'Do You wear a seatbelt when in the car?' or 'Do You wear a helmet when bike-riding?' We're asked these things every year for the kids physicals. The concern of pediatricians is for the kids safety, not Your 2nd amendment rights. Not whether you have a gun or not but if it's locked up like it should be. No biggie.

Peace. K*

reply to post by MurderCityDevil


If you are only going to quote a part of my post, please indicate that you are doing so.

Thank you in advance,
TruthTellist

reply to post by TruthTellist


ok indicated

HEY everyone, i only used part of his post, so pay no attention to what I had to say

I cannot remember which website it was, but someone else posted this exact same scenario a few months ago. I am as shocked now as I was then. I cannot remember if that person asked the doctor why they asked such a thing. It has been some time ago, and my memory ain't all that great these days. But I found it very odd that two people posted on separate forums about the exact same thing. I wish I could remember where I read it last time.

This is hypocrisy.

From the Universal Declaration of Human Rights
Adopted and Proclaimed by General Assembly Resolution 217 A (III)
of December 10 1948

www.un.org...

Article Article 3.
Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of person.
3.

And furthermore:

Article 12.
No one shall be subjected to arbitrary interference with his privacy, family, home or correspondence, nor to attacks upon his honour and reputation. Everyone has the right to the protection of the law against such interference or attacks.

Also:

Article 16.
(3) The family is the natural and fundamental group unit of society and is entitled to protection by society and the State.

According to this Declaration your basic human rights have been violated...

reply to post by antar


are you serious? she was not interogating the man, she was, more or less, in my opinion concerned for child safety

again that is my opinion

do you think there would be any follow up with police or FBI? of course there would be if it was that dangerous or maybe they just have his info now

and if so, if he bought the gun, theyd already know he owns it cause it is registered unless its a hot gun, which at that point i would have said no, there are no guns in the house and just made a point to say the kid was talking about toy guns

whoopie doo the dr is asking questions, i highly doubt she has time in her busy Dr life to be an informant, being that the gun is registered and they know he owns it anyway

child care and safety

good f-ing grief

reply to post by Ian McLean
Thanks for the information Ian. I never heard about this little agenda being pushed. What's next?

seem obvius to me that, the docter finds you distant or unstable and might be worried about the childs injury.

I expect this to be completly false but millions of false claims are made each year by doctors of children being beaten and such.

I am not looking to sue anybody, I just questioned her integrity for asking my child a question like that. Why is it that people think that just because she is a Dr. that she has the right to question my child about anything?
I took my son in for a physical to be sure he was in good health. There is now and never has been any physical abuse in my family, therefore she has no right to ask such questions, period.
Yes it was a simple question, but where does it stop? Are they going to start asking my child about my political view point. How about my sexual preferences? What websites I like to view? This may seem a little over the top, but I am a private person for the most part, and I am very, some may say overly, protective of my children. I for one am tired of the government thinking that they can raise my children better than me. Too them they are noting more than a social security number and a future source of money. To me they are my whole life.

reply to post by Daz3d-n-Confus3d


now i can see why you had posted to begin with

you say you are private and to have someone kind of peak in really irked you

completely understandable, i guarantee that dr is willing to talk with you if you had asked why she asked about the guns

most likely and without a doubt in my mind, she would say, "child safety"

many children each year either die or are injured from guns in the house

thats all, seriously i think you should speak with her and youll feel much more at ease

being a private person, i can see how that rattled you cage

but any harm behind it? i doubt it

so pay no attention to what I had to say

reply to post by MurderCityDevil



Thats great advice ! I'll take it !

This is policy trickling down from the powers that be. It is interesting how many people accept this kind of behavior. Like I said before in this thread. People need to remember who they are. We've been duped and it's time we all woke up

the U.N. today has implemented or is in the process of implementing all the planks of Adam Weishaupt's Manifesto. When George Bush took us to war in the Persian Gulf, he stated boldly that he didn't need the approval of Congress anymore to declare war because he had a U.N. Mandate. We have sacrificed a large part of our U.S. sovereignty. The U.N. has recently passed a Declaration of Children's Right's. It is now a RIGHT of the child to receive vaccinations, which do more harm than good, and a parent doesn't have the right to interfere. Parents who interfere with the rights of a child or abuse a child or are accused of abuse can have their children taken by the state. If you are seen spanking a child more than two or three times, the child abuse police will be unleashed against you. This amounts to nothing more than a giant power transfer, from US to THEM. The only way they can do this is by tricking us into thinking that we are so irresponsible that we cannot manage our own affairs and lives and that the state is better suited to raise our children. If you still like the U.N. then wait until you get hit with the new U.N. TAX that is coming.

Source

[edit on 29-7-2008 by Swingarm]

Originally posted by TruthTellist
reply to post by MurderCityDevil

 

This doctor is likely to be following a new set of protocols given to him by Homeland Security or some other nefarious anti-terror division.

Actually, it's the other way around. The Department of Homeland Security works for the Corporations.

When I read the parent post about the gun asking doctor, the first thing that occurred to me was the insurance company. They want to gather this kind of information so that they can use it some how. Not to take guns away - no. Insurance companies couldn't care less about Joe Citizen's gun. What they want to do is have a reason to charge higher premiums or have a reason to accuse the customer that he/she withheld information on their insurance application so the insurance company can get out of paying for large medical expenses if the family needs it. That's what insurance companies do.

It's all about money. Here's another thing: The Department of Homeland Security, NSA, wiretapping, etc... It's not about anything more than collecting data for corporations so that they can understand us, the "consumers" better. They want data for demographics, what products we are talking about, etc.

And you know what the beautiful part of this is, for the Corporations? They don't have to pay for it!! The taxpayers (aka, consumers) pay for it!! The Gov't bureaucrats love it because they get HUGE budgets to spy on us.

That's why they passed the patriot acts, not to protect us, but to gather data about us. Think about it: The 9/11 Commission basically concluded that we had enough information to stop the highjackers, but they couldn't "connect-the-dots".

To that I ask them this: if you couldn't connect the dots you already had (lacked the ability to process the data), then why would they need "more data"?!? If they couldn't process X data points before, what makes them think they'd be able to process X*2 data points now?

The answer is what I stated above: more data for Corporations so they can figure out more ways to squeeze every last dime out of us.

reply to post by harrytuttle


Good Theory. It Reminds me of what happened with Lexus-Nexus.

Every entity which does such data mining has their own purpose, and often the data is shared. Even Wal-mart does it.

Homeland Security has a Different purpose than the Wal-Mart corporation, but that does not mean they do not share some interests.

However, one of these entities is far more dangerous than the other, and it is this one who makes the illegal intrusions into the lives of my patients often via deceit, subterfuge and force.

reply to post by TruthTellist


Here is another interesting article about big brother.

U.S. government: We know parenting better than you

The U.S. House of Representatives is scheduled to debate two bills that could give the federal government unprecedented control over the way parents raise their children – even providing funds for state workers to come into homes and screen babies for emotional and developmental problems.