The Virginian-Pilot
©
It's official. Some in this country learned absolutely nothing from the massacre at Virginia Tech.
Yes, most colleges have developed rapid-communications systems to alert their students to emergencies. But the key reason that one deranged student was able to kill 32 people and wound dozens more seems to have faded with the passing of time.
The lesson everyone should have learned that black day in Blacksburg is this: Medical privacy rights never trump public safety. Odd, then, that the federal government is determined to punish mental health professionals who disclose sensitive medical information about individuals who may pose a danger to society.
Psychiatrists like Dr. Richard Alan Kaye of Suffolk.
On Tuesday, a federal judge in Norfolk sent prosecutors packing after they tried to send Kaye to prison for discreetly informing the Virginia State Police that one of their troopers had been involuntarily committed to a mental institution. The feds accused the doctor of acting out of spite.
U.S. District Judge Rebecca Beach Smith dismissed charges against the doctor as soon as the government finished presenting its case.
Excellent.
Professionals who put common sense and public safety ahead of slavish adherence to overly broad laws should be commended, not treated like criminals.
Maybe it's time someone reminded federal prosecutors what can happen when mental health professionals worship at the altar of privacy. Heck, I'll do it.
On April 16, 2007, Virginia Tech student Seung-Hui Cho carried out a demented plan to methodically shoot and kill random students and faculty members on the Tech campus. The carnage didn't stop until he finally put a bullet in his own head.
In the aftermath, we learned that this young man had been mentally ill for years. He'd even been ordered by a judge to be evaluated after he was caught stalking female students.
So why wasn't this unbalanced student expelled from school? Why weren't his parents notified when his psychosis deepened?
Three words: medical privacy laws.
Strict interpretations of laws designed to protect medical records from prying eyes and commercial databases allowed Cho to stay in school and shielded students and faculty members from knowing a madman was in their midst.
Even so, some teachers had their suspicions about Cho. In fact, when professor and poet Nikki Giovanni learned about the shootings, she said she knew immediately who was responsible: the "mean" kid she'd kicked out of class.
Pity Cho wasn't also booted out of school.
Fast-forward four years, and we find a local psychiatrist charged with three felonies, crimes carrying the possibility of 15 years in prison. Why? Because he did exactly what we'd want a mental health professional to do upon learning that a former patient - one who routinely carries a gun, no less - has been committed.
According to news reports, the trooper in question endured a horror of her own in 2007. She was raped and held hostage by two criminals for three nights. She suffered intense mental anguish. But once she'd been involuntarily committed to a mental hospital, Dr. Kaye - her former doctor and a person she reportedly reached out to as she was being sent away - notified the trooper's superiors.
The trooper was temporarily suspended and required to be examined by another psychiatrist. Ultimately, she was deemed fit for duty and sent back to work.
A sad story, yes. But one that should have ended there, not in federal court.
Kerry Dougherty, (757) 446-2306, kerry.dougherty@cox.net
Delicious
Digg
Reddit
Facebook
Twitter
Google
Yahoo
I think the article failed
I think the article failed to prove how privacy laws are the evil here. WHEN was the trooper involuntarily commited? If after July 1, 2008, then the laws regarding mental health & firearms were in place, laws enforced by VSP, that would have removed the trooper's firearm, thereby making the doctor's choice unreasonable. IF the law wasn't in place, then yeah, I'd say the doctor was reasonable in reporting the trooper. A little more information goes a long way here.
Background check improvement and medical records.
The law you two are referencing was supposed to improve background checks by getting states to report mental health disqualifications to the database. If I recall an article last summer said about 1/3 of the states have done this. (to be updated)
Bob is right in that the bill (and signed law) did not ban anyone. It does add a way to properly see who is not legally able to purchase a fire arm.
The failure is in schools that rather than report criminal activity that could decrease enrollment choose to cover up crimes committed on campus.
State Code 18.2-308.1:3
State Code 18.2-308.1:3 states, in relevant part:
It shall be unlawful for any person involuntarily admitted to a facility or ordered to mandatory outpatient treatment pursuant to § 19.2-169.2, involuntarily admitted to a facility or ordered to mandatory outpatient treatment as the result of a commitment hearing pursuant to Article 5 (§ 37.2-814 et seq.) of Chapter 8 of Title 37.2, or who was the subject of a temporary detention order pursuant to § 37.2-809 and subsequently agreed to voluntary admission pursuant to § 37.2-805 to purchase, POSSESS or TRANSPORT a firearm.
So, it does ban people from owning firearms. They can petition the General District court for an order to reinstate their "competency" to carry.
Mayors against illegal guns
Press releases from last year say 25 states and DC have yet to report to NICS.
HR 2640-and NRA support
Josh is the one who needs to check his facts concerning NRA support for gun control.
According to the NRAILA website, HR2640 "does not ban ANYONE from owning a gun". Those are the words of the NRA, not mine and indicate the failure of any legislation to control the spread of lethal weapons into the hands of Cho in 2007 or Jared Loughner in 2011.
Nothing has changed to moderate the views of extremists who worship at the altar of gun ownership and who hail the dying words of Charlton Heston, "from, my cold dead hands". The blood of the victims of Cho, Jared Loughner, John Hinckler, Jr. will never be washed from their hands.
Three Words: No Gun Control
Sadly, Kerry misses the bullseye when she tries to aim the blame fort the carnage at Virginia Tech at medical privacy laws. In fact her targeting of medical privacy laws as the reason why Cho was able to gun down his classmates, misses the mark by a mile.
She should understand that the damage was caused by a three letter word: GUN. Cho's insanity was NOT a matter of medical privacy. His parents, classmates and teachers all saw this coming. So, why then do organizations like the NRA insist on providing lethal weapons to people who are medically insane?
Bullseye! The NRA is insane and yet no one stands up to their pathological belief that no one should ever be denied the right to bear arms. Crazy is as crazy does.
Exactly. Cho's mental health
Exactly. Cho's mental health problems were not only clear to others, but also addressed by the court system [i.e. Temp. Detention Order], which as a reporter should know, is pretty fair game to those who are curious enough to look [sans sealed search warrants].
I empathize with you, but have to disagree
It's easy to blame the gun lobby for tragedies like this...but, the fact of the matter is that people have to recognize the second amendment (and subsequent court decisions around it) is here to stay. You don't have to agree with it, but you do need to work with it. Under that premise, the issue needs to turn to those other avenues available to prevent such horrific things from happening - my lot is cast with Ms. Dougherty - in the absence of the ability to regulate guns, we need to regulate the types of people who can obtain them. This is done by indemnifying those who step up and report problematic people and protecting them against charges of slander or discrimination...
check your facts
The VT shooting was April 16, 2007. A bill (H.R. 2640) closing the only loophole that enabled Cho to purchase a gun was signed into law January 5, 2008. This bill was supported by both the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence and the National Rifle Association.
From my experience.........
The personal injury lawyers are bad enough but lately some Commonwealth Attorneys have been involved in some questionable charges being filed on people. The sad thing is that occasionally some of these folks although they have commited no crimes, and broken no laws, are still convicted. The system is far from perfect.