Citation

Paola FA. South. Med. J. 2001; 94(1): 88-92.

Affiliation

Department of Internal Medicine, University of South Florida College of Medicine, Tampa 33612-4799, USA.

Copyright

(Copyright © 2001, Southern Medical Association)

DOI

unavailable

PMID

11213953

Abstract

To explore the potential legal consequences to physicians of counseling their patients about gun violence, I consider the question: If a patient divests herself of a firearm upon the advice of her physician and is subsequently the victim of a rape, robbery, aggravated assault, or homicide, could she or her survivors argue convincingly that her physician was negligent? In attempting to answer this question, the four elements that a patient must establish to prevail in a malpractice action against a physician are discussed, and possible strategies for establishing them in the hypothetical case are explored. I conclude that plausible arguments can be made against the hypothetical physician engaged in firearm counseling as described. Conversely, physicians not engaging in discussions of gun safety face substantially lower liability risks.