A judge has to adjudicate someone mentally defective, a MD or psychiatrist alone doesn't have that power. The article posted was full of pants shitting hysterics, all the new rule does is make an exception to HIPPA for reporting those already prohibited from owning firearms. Im not for the rule change but its far from the order for confiscation people think it is. A doctor cannot report you to NICS for taking SSRI'S for premature ejaculation or depression, it would be a complete violation of HIPPA because this information does not trigger the DQ and the MD cannot adjudicate people. I just want wanted to make it clear that I am not for this EA, I would prefer ZERO gun laws, I just dont want people being fed misinformation by both sides of the aisle.
This was taken from the PDF document with the proposed changes.
" The rule specifically prohibits the disclosure of diagnostic or clinical
information, from medical records or other sources, and any mental health information
beyond the indication that the individual is subject to the Federal mental health
prohibitor"
"The Privacy Rule seeks to balance individuals’ privacy interests with important
public policy goals including public health and safety. In doing so, the Privacy Rule
allows, subject to certain conditions and limitations, uses and disclosures of PHI without
individuals’ authorization for certain law enforcement purposes, to avert a serious threat
to health or safety, and where required by State or other law, among other purposes.15
As stated above, individuals who are subject to the Federal mental health
prohibitor are ineligible to purchase a firearm because they have been “committed to a
mental institution” or “adjudicated as a mental defective.”
16 DOJ regulations define these
categories to include persons who have been involuntarily committed to a mental
institution for reasons such as mental illness or drug use; have been found incompetent to
stand trial or not guilty by reason of insanity; or otherwise have been determined by a
court, board, commission, or other lawful authority to be a danger to themselves or others
or unable to manage their own affairs, as a result of marked subnormal intelligence, or
mental illness, incompetency, condition, or disease. In many cases, these records are not
subject to HIPAA. Records of individuals adjudicated as incompetent to stand trial, or
not guilty by reason of insanity, originate with entities in the criminal justice system, and
these entities are not HIPAA covered entities. Likewise, involuntary civil commitments
usually are made by court order, and thus, records of such formal commitments typically
originate with entities in the justice system. In addition, many adjudications determining
that individuals are a danger to themselves or others, or are incapable of managing their
own affairs, occur through a legal process in the court system. "
" The prohibitor
does not apply to individuals in a psychiatric facility for observation or who have been
admitted voluntarily; thus, the proposed rule would not have permitted disclosures with
respect to those individuals."
"Under this final rule, covered entities that order involuntary commitments or
make other adjudications that subject individuals to the Federal mental health prohibitor, or that serve as repositories of the relevant data, are permitted to use or disclose the information needed for NICS reporting of such individuals either directly to the NICS or
to a State repository of NICS data. Thus, if a covered health care entity also has a role in
the relevant mental health adjudications or serves as a State data repository, it now may
disclose the relevant information for NICS reporting purposes under this new permission
even if it is not designated as a HIPAA hybrid entity or required by State law to report.
This final rule does not create an express permission for covered entities to disclose for
NICS reporting purposes the PHI of individuals who are subject to State-only mental
health prohibitors"
"First, we
limit the permission to only those covered entities that order the involuntary
commitments or make the other adjudications that cause individuals to be subject to the
Federal mental health prohibitor, or that serve as repositories of such information for
NICS reporting purposes. Thus, the rule does not affect most treating providers or create
a permission for them to disclose PHI about their own patients for these purposes.
Second, we permit such entities to disclose NICS data only to designated repositories or
the NICS. Third, we limit the information that may be disclosed to certain demographic
or other information that is necessary for NICS reporting. Finally, we do not expand the
permission to encompass State law prohibitor information. These aspects of the
provision are discussed more fully below. By limiting the permission in these ways, we
protect the patient-provider relationship."
"In response to concerns that the rule unfairly singles out individuals with mental
illness, we emphasize, as we did in the proposed rule, that a mental health diagnosis does
not, in itself, make an individual subject to the Federal mental health prohibitor, which
requires an involuntary commitment or adjudication that the individual poses a danger to
self or others or lacks the mental capacity to contract or manage his or her own affairs."
"This final rule addresses HIPAA-related barriers to entities reporting certain
information to the NICS about individuals who are subject to the Federal mental health
prohibitor. The rule does not expand the categories of federally prohibited persons or
modify the criteria for determining that a person is subject to the Federal mental health
prohibitor."
http://s3.amazonaws.com/public-inspection.federalregister.gov/2015-33181.pdf
Sorry for the format of the quotes, I was directly copy and pasting from the linked PDF file.