Results 1 to 21 of 21

Thread: Am I Eligible for chp if I had some social anxiety and phobia issues?

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Virginia
    Posts
    1

    Am I Eligible for chp if I had some social anxiety and phobia issues?

    I had some social anxiety and phobia issues, and voluntarily sought the help of a psychiatrist, to help me work through them. Basic "did you hate your mother" type stuff. Does this mean that I am not eligible to receive a permit to carry? I live in Virginia. Thanks for any advice and input

  2. #2
    Regular Member WalkingWolf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    North Carolina
    Posts
    12,276
    You should ask in the Virginia sub forum. But unless you were committed I doubt there would be a problem.
    It is well that war is so terrible – otherwise we would grow too fond of it.
    Robert E. Lee
    The patriot volunteer, fighting for country and his rights, makes the most reliable soldier on earth.
    Thomas Jonathan "Stonewall" Jackson
    What separates the winners from the losers is how a person reacts to each new twist of fate.
    President Donald Trump

  3. #3
    Regular Member motoxmann's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Middletown, CT
    Posts
    763
    Quote Originally Posted by WalkingWolf View Post
    You should ask in the Virginia sub forum. But unless you were committed I doubt there would be a problem.
    x2, to both of those aspects. best asked in the VA section
    “Tyranny is defined as that which is legal for the government but illegal for the citizenry.” ~Thomas Jefferson
    www.CTCarry.com

  4. #4
    Regular Member Gil223's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Weber County Utah
    Posts
    1,428
    Quote Originally Posted by jcman01 View Post
    I had some social anxiety and phobia issues, and voluntarily sought the help of a psychiatrist, to help me work through them. Basic "did you hate your mother" type stuff. Does this mean that I am not eligible to receive a permit to carry? I live in Virginia. Thanks for any advice and input
    Keep in mind that IANAL or a psychiatrist! This is strictly a layman's view of your situation. Most places I have held a permit usually use the terms "adjudged" and/or "committed" on their applications, and (as of today, anyway) there is still "doctor-patient confidentiality" (the shrink can't narc on you, unless you admitted to performing serious criminal acts.

    Unless you admitted yourself to a mental health facility, then you weren't "adjudged or committed" in the English language, and I don't believe it would be wrong of you to answer "No" on any forms. It would be a different story if the question is "Have you ever engaged the services of a mental health professional?" From what you say, the truthful answer would then be "Yes." Good luck, and PAX...
    MOLON LABE
    COUNTRY FIRST
    Glocks ROCK!

  5. #5
    Moderator / Administrator Grapeshot's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    North Chesterfield, Va.
    Posts
    34,613
    Quote Originally Posted by WalkingWolf View Post
    You should ask in the Virginia sub forum. But unless you were committed I doubt there would be a problem.
    Moved it.
    You will not rise to the occasion; you will fall back on your level of training.” Archilochus, 650 BC

    Old and treacherous will beat young and skilled every time. Yata hey.

  6. #6
    Accomplished Advocate peter nap's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    13,580
    Quote Originally Posted by Gil223 View Post
    there is still "doctor-patient confidentiality" (the shrink can't narc on you, unless you admitted to performing serious criminal acts.
    I agree he's probably eligible but just to clear up Doctor Patient Confidentiality...HPPA sends all records into a central Database now. Homeland Security is now taking responsibility for those records and using them to weed out security threats.

    As more mental health disclosure laws are passed, they will be used more to determine eligibility to pass background checks I think.

    A lot of Doctors organizations are protesting Homeland Security's involvement.

    There is NO Doctor/Patient confidentially anymore.

  7. #7
    Regular Member WalkingWolf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    North Carolina
    Posts
    12,276
    Quote Originally Posted by peter nap View Post
    I agree he's probably eligible but just to clear up Doctor Patient Confidentiality...HPPA sends all records into a central Database now. Homeland Security is now taking responsibility for those records and using them to weed out security threats.

    As more mental health disclosure laws are passed, they will be used more to determine eligibility to pass background checks I think.

    A lot of Doctors organizations are protesting Homeland Security's involvement.

    There is NO Doctor/Patient confidentially anymore.
    And so ends people needing help actually seeking help.
    It is well that war is so terrible – otherwise we would grow too fond of it.
    Robert E. Lee
    The patriot volunteer, fighting for country and his rights, makes the most reliable soldier on earth.
    Thomas Jonathan "Stonewall" Jackson
    What separates the winners from the losers is how a person reacts to each new twist of fate.
    President Donald Trump

  8. #8
    Regular Member 2a4all's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Newport News, VA, ,
    Posts
    1,586
    Quote Originally Posted by peter nap View Post
    I agree he's probably eligible but just to clear up Doctor Patient Confidentiality...HPPA sends all records into a central Database now. Homeland Security is now taking responsibility for those records and using them to weed out security threats.

    As more mental health disclosure laws are passed, they will be used more to determine eligibility to pass background checks I think.

    A lot of Doctors organizations are protesting Homeland Security's involvement.

    There is NO Doctor/Patient confidentially anymore.
    That sounds pretty ominous. Where'd you hear that?

    ETA: It is possible that DHS is doing this for those who signed consent forms as part of the application process for a security clearance. It's certainly more cost effective than having to obtain records from an applicant's health care providers.

    Not to say that the gov't is all that careful when perusing an applicant's records though.
    Last edited by 2a4all; 02-22-2013 at 01:47 PM.
    A law-abiding citizen should be able to carry his personal protection firearm anywhere that an armed criminal might go.

    Member VCDL, NRA

  9. #9
    Regular Member Gil223's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Weber County Utah
    Posts
    1,428
    Quote Originally Posted by 2a4all View Post
    That sounds pretty ominous. Where'd you hear that?

    ETA: It is possible that DHS is doing this for those who signed consent forms as part of the application process for a security clearance. It's certainly more cost effective than having to obtain records from an applicant's health care providers.

    Not to say that the gov't is all that careful when perusing an applicant's records though.
    If you have been to the doctor or hospital in the last 10 or so years, you will have had to sign a HIPAA form in order to receive care. That form is what allows the government to access your medical records.
    The HIPAA Administrative Simplification standards adopted by Health and Human Services (HHS) under the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (HIPAA) apply to any entity that is

    • a health care provider that conducts certain transactions in electronic form (called here a "covered health care provider").
    • a health care clearinghouse.
    • a health plan.

    An entity that is one or more of these types of entities is referred to as a "covered entity" in the Administrative Simplification regulations. The DLTs for determining who is a covered entity are at http://www.cms.gov/Regulations-and-G...titycharts.pdf
    Things will get even worse under "ObamaCare", since the government will then become a "health plan" provider. BOHICA!
    Pax...
    Last edited by Gil223; 02-22-2013 at 03:49 PM.
    MOLON LABE
    COUNTRY FIRST
    Glocks ROCK!

  10. #10
    Accomplished Advocate peter nap's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    13,580
    Quote Originally Posted by 2a4all View Post
    That sounds pretty ominous. Where'd you hear that?

    ETA: It is possible that DHS is doing this for those who signed consent forms as part of the application process for a security clearance. It's certainly more cost effective than having to obtain records from an applicant's health care providers.

    Not to say that the gov't is all that careful when perusing an applicant's records though.
    Don't you read the news?

    Doctors have been raising almighty hell about it for a month.

    HIPPA is old news and they've been putting everyone's information in that for years.
    There's no consent form, that's where the records are stored now.

  11. #11
    Accomplished Advocate user's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Northern Piedmont of Virginia
    Posts
    2,373
    You are not eligible if you have been 1) determined by a court to be mentally incompetent for any reason; 2) involuntarily detained for psychological or psychiatric treatment following a period of observation pursuant to a temporary detention order; or 3) voluntarily committed for psychological or psychiatric treatment. If you understand that you have a biochemical deficiency or psychological disorder that requires treatment of some kind, and you want to have a firearm, you should consult your psychologist or psychiatrist about why you want it, how you intend to use it, and what will be the likely outcome of your being in possession of a firearm in situations in which you have not been able to continue your treatment, whether pharmacological or otherwise. If you feel that there is a risk that you could become unable to control your actions and that you might be tempted on such occasions to use the gun improperly, then you should, as part of your regime of discipline, decide not to have a gun. Your having a gun in such situations will ramp up the severity of the outcome in ways you won't believe, and society will not understand what happened to you or why. And really won't care what happens to you. So please, even if you are legally eligible, make a wise choice.
    Daniel L. Hawes - 540 347 2430 - HTTP://www.VirginiaLegalDefense.com

    By the way, nothing I say on this website as "user" should be taken as either advertising for attorney services or legal advice, merely personal opinion. Everyone having a question regarding the application of law to the facts of their situation should seek the advice of an attorney competent in the subject matter of the issues presented and licensed to practice in the relevant state.

  12. #12
    Regular Member Gil223's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Weber County Utah
    Posts
    1,428
    Quote Originally Posted by user View Post
    You are not eligible if you have been 1) determined by a court to be mentally incompetent for any reason; 2) involuntarily detained for psychological or psychiatric treatment following a period of observation pursuant to a temporary detention order; or 3) voluntarily committed for psychological or psychiatric treatment. If you understand that you have a biochemical deficiency or psychological disorder that requires treatment of some kind, and you want to have a firearm, you should consult your psychologist or psychiatrist about why you want it, how you intend to use it, and what will be the likely outcome of your being in possession of a firearm in situations in which you have not been able to continue your treatment, whether pharmacological or otherwise. If you feel that there is a risk that you could become unable to control your actions and that you might be tempted on such occasions to use the gun improperly, then you should, as part of your regime of discipline, decide not to have a gun. Your having a gun in such situations will ramp up the severity of the outcome in ways you won't believe, and society will not understand what happened to you or why. And really won't care what happens to you. So please, even if you are legally eligible, make a wise choice.
    Nothing there sounds unreasonable - "committed" being the operative word. Pax...
    MOLON LABE
    COUNTRY FIRST
    Glocks ROCK!

  13. #13
    Regular Member 2a4all's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Newport News, VA, ,
    Posts
    1,586
    Quote Originally Posted by Gil223 View Post
    If you have been to the doctor or hospital in the last 10 or so years, you will have had to sign a HIPAA form in order to receive care. That form is what allows the government to access your medical records.

    Things will get even worse under "ObamaCare", since the government will then become a "health plan" provider. BOHICA!
    Pax...
    Who told you that. The HIPPA form doesn't give the gov't access to your records. The whole system describes what people who handle patient medical records must do to assure patient privacy. And yes, there are provisions in the law that allow for access under certain conditions. BTW, I'm already on Medicare.

    Quote Originally Posted by peter nap View Post
    Don't you read the news?

    Doctors have been raising almighty hell about it for a month.

    HIPPA is old news and they've been putting everyone's information in that for years.
    There's no consent form, that's where the records are stored now.
    I haven't seen anything in the news about doctors complaining about the issue. Could you point me to a source?

    I'm aware of HIPPA. Every doctor my wife and I have seen (and that's a bunch) doesn't like the system because it actually encumbers their ability to exchange patient information with each other (e.g. a specialist reporting his findings to the patient's primary care physician) because each and every such disclosure requires the consent of the patient. Even spouses must have consent forms on file to share records with each other. And it involves paper. And secure electronic systems.

    AFIK, HIPPA is administered by HHS. I was questioning the involvement of DHS. The "consent form" I was referring to has to do with an applicant for a (gov't) job allowing the employing agency to conduct a background check. Is DHS doing that for civil service now?
    A law-abiding citizen should be able to carry his personal protection firearm anywhere that an armed criminal might go.

    Member VCDL, NRA

  14. #14
    Accomplished Advocate peter nap's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    13,580
    Quote Originally Posted by 2a4all View Post
    Who told you that. The HIPPA form doesn't give the gov't access to your records. The whole system describes what people who handle patient medical records must do to assure patient privacy. And yes, there are provisions in the law that allow for access under certain conditions. BTW, I'm already on Medicare.


    I haven't seen anything in the news about doctors complaining about the issue. Could you point me to a source?

    I'm aware of HIPPA. Every doctor my wife and I have seen (and that's a bunch) doesn't like the system because it actually encumbers their ability to exchange patient information with each other (e.g. a specialist reporting his findings to the patient's primary care physician) because each and every such disclosure requires the consent of the patient. Even spouses must have consent forms on file to share records with each other. And it involves paper. And secure electronic systems.

    AFIK, HIPPA is administered by HHS. I was questioning the involvement of DHS. The "consent form" I was referring to has to do with an applicant for a (gov't) job allowing the employing agency to conduct a background check. Is DHS doing that for civil service now?
    Here's a piece of it. You have to dig a little more to get Homeand Security's role in it. Look at the recent Congressional hearings about extending parts of the Patriot Act.

    http://huelskamp.house.gov/index.php...rticle&id=3636

    This time, America is learning about the federal government’s plan to collect and aggregate confidential patient records for every one of us.
    In a proposed rule from Secretary Kathleen Sebelius and the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), the federal government is demanding insurance companies submit detailed health care information about their patients.
    (See Proposed Rule: Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act; Standards Related to Reinsurance, Risk Corridors and Risk Adjustment, Volume 76, page 41930.Proposed rule docket ID is HHS-OS-2011-0022
    The HHS has proposed the federal government pursue one of three paths to obtain this sensitive information: A “centralized approach” wherein insurers’ data go directly to Washington; an “intermediate state-level approach” in which insurers give the information to the 50 states; or a “distributed approach” in which health insurance companies crunch the numbers according to federal bureaucrat edict.
    It’s par for the course with the federal government, but abstract terms are used to distract from the real objectives of this idea: no matter which “option” is chosen, government bureaucrats would have access to the health records of every American - including you.

  15. #15
    Regular Member Gil223's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Weber County Utah
    Posts
    1,428
    Quote Originally Posted by 2a4all View Post
    Who told you that. The HIPPA form doesn't give the gov't access to your records. The whole system describes what people who handle patient medical records must do to assure patient privacy. And yes, there are provisions in the law that allow for access under certain conditions. BTW, I'm already on Medicare.
    Did you overlook this -
    Name:  HIPAA.JPG
Views: 172
Size:  45.2 KB

    Under Medicare the government is already your primary insurer. Congratulations, and BOHICA. Pax...
    MOLON LABE
    COUNTRY FIRST
    Glocks ROCK!

  16. #16
    Regular Member 2a4all's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Newport News, VA, ,
    Posts
    1,586
    Quote Originally Posted by Gil223 View Post
    Did you overlook this -
    Name:  HIPAA.JPG
Views: 172
Size:  45.2 KB

    Under Medicare the government is already your primary insurer. Congratulations, and BOHICA. Pax...
    Really?

    But you might want to check out http://www.hhs.gov/ocr/privacy/hipaa.../guidance.html
    A law-abiding citizen should be able to carry his personal protection firearm anywhere that an armed criminal might go.

    Member VCDL, NRA

  17. #17
    Regular Member 2a4all's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Newport News, VA, ,
    Posts
    1,586
    Quote Originally Posted by peter nap View Post
    Here's a piece of it. You have to dig a little more to get Homeand Security's role in it. Look at the recent Congressional hearings about extending parts of the Patriot Act.

    http://huelskamp.house.gov/index.php...rticle&id=3636

    This time, America is learning about the federal government’s plan to collect and aggregate confidential patient records for every one of us.
    In a proposed rule from Secretary Kathleen Sebelius and the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), the federal government is demanding insurance companies submit detailed health care information about their patients.
    (See Proposed Rule: Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act; Standards Related to Reinsurance, Risk Corridors and Risk Adjustment, Volume 76, page 41930.Proposed rule docket ID is HHS-OS-2011-0022
    The HHS has proposed the federal government pursue one of three paths to obtain this sensitive information: A “centralized approach” wherein insurers’ data go directly to Washington; an “intermediate state-level approach” in which insurers give the information to the 50 states; or a “distributed approach” in which health insurance companies crunch the numbers according to federal bureaucrat edict.
    It’s par for the course with the federal government, but abstract terms are used to distract from the real objectives of this idea: no matter which “option” is chosen, government bureaucrats would have access to the health records of every American - including you.
    Thanks.

    Although Sebelius' is only proposing, aggregate health data collection has been authorized (and even required) under HIPPA for a while.

    http://www.hhs.gov/ocr/privacy/hipaa.../guidance.html

    Supposedly, it's been to determine things like the effectiveness of medical care and perhaps weigh it against the cost. My own experience has been that medical insurance companies, who do get details of one's health records, aren't bashful about telling you what they'll cover, and in at least one case, declined coverage for a procedure that Medicare did cover. (At the time, we weren't eligible for Medicare.)

    As we all know, the cost of medical care can erupt quite unexpectedly in a very short time. With (good) insurance, one can concentrate on dealing with the medical problem(s). Without it, or with inadequate coverage, the problems magnify. Insurance companies have already altered their strategies to compensate for the ACA, and not to the benefit of policy holders. Medicare, which must cover everyone eligible, is also looking to control its costs.

    Medical care providers aren't bashful about asking for payment either. I developed computer software for an attorney who only did debt collection. His largest segment of collectibles was medical debt, and he wasn't chasing insurance companies.

    Do I care of the government collects all my medical data? Not really. Our medical bills get paid. However, finding physicians who'll take new Medicare patients is becoming harder.

    Anyway, let's return this thread to its original path.
    A law-abiding citizen should be able to carry his personal protection firearm anywhere that an armed criminal might go.

    Member VCDL, NRA

  18. #18
    Accomplished Advocate peter nap's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    13,580
    Quote Originally Posted by WalkingWolf View Post
    And so ends people needing help actually seeking help.
    No, a lot of them will go anyway. Many don't actually realize what's being done to us and many more have the "I don't have anything to hide" mentality......which is exactly why the Government is getting away with these things.

  19. #19
    Regular Member MKEgal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    in front of my computer, WI
    Posts
    4,426
    Quote Originally Posted by Gil223
    as of today, anyway there is still "doctor-patient confidentiality" - the shrink can't narc on you, unless you admitted to performing serious criminal acts.
    I'll ask a psychiatrist I know, to be sure, but I've been told that they can only break confidentiality if the patient admits to wanting to harm him/herself or others. Basically, they'd be preventing harm.

    If their Tuesday 1pm patient admits to being the reincarnation of Dahmer & stewing his roommate, that completed murder wouldn't allow them to run to the police. If he said he was planning (or wanted) to have his neighbor over for dinner, then disclosure would be allowed to prevent a murder.

    Quote Originally Posted by user
    You are not eligible if you have been
    1) determined by a court to be mentally incompetent for any reason;
    2) involuntarily detained for psychological or psychiatric treatment following a period of observation pursuant to a temporary detention order;
    or 3) voluntarily committed for psychological or psychiatric treatment.
    #1 is part of the federal law, but I'm not familiar with 2 & 3. Are those VA laws? Do they only apply to getting a carry license, or does VA also have more stringent rules about firearms possession? Because voluntarily getting treatment for a disease shouldn't be a factor.

    you should consult your psychologist or psychiatrist about why you want it, how you intend to use it, and what will be the likely outcome of your being in possession of a firearm in situations in which you have not been able to continue your treatment
    Maybe it's different in VA, but around here finding any sort of medical professional who hasn't drunk the koolaid about "all guns are evil" is difficult. Finding one who's actually willing to rationally discuss the lawful possession & use of firearms is next to impossible.
    Quote Originally Posted by MLK, Jr
    The ultimate measure of a man is not where he stands in moments of comfort & convenience, but where he stands at times of challenge & controversy.
    Quote Originally Posted by MSG Laigaie
    Citizenship is a verb.
    Quote Originally Posted by Proverbs 27:12
    A prudent person foresees the danger ahead and takes precautions.
    The simpleton goes blindly on and suffers the consequences.
    Quote Originally Posted by Proverbs 31:17
    She dresses herself with strength and makes her arms strong.

  20. #20
    Regular Member 2a4all's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Newport News, VA, ,
    Posts
    1,586
    Quote Originally Posted by MKEgal View Post
    I'll ask a psychiatrist I know, to be sure, but I've been told that they can only break confidentiality if the patient admits to wanting to harm him/herself or others. Basically, they'd be preventing harm.

    If their Tuesday 1pm patient admits to being the reincarnation of Dahmer & stewing his roommate, that completed murder wouldn't allow them to run to the police. If he said he was planning (or wanted) to have his neighbor over for dinner, then disclosure would be allowed to prevent a murder.


    #1 is part of the federal law, but I'm not familiar with 2 & 3. Are those VA laws? Do they only apply to getting a carry license, or does VA also have more stringent rules about firearms possession? Because voluntarily getting treatment for a disease shouldn't be a factor.


    Maybe it's different in VA, but around here finding any sort of medical professional who hasn't drunk the koolaid about "all guns are evil" is difficult. Finding one who's actually willing to rationally discuss the lawful possession & use of firearms is next to impossible.
    There is a practicing psychiatrist who OC's and posts on here. My optometrist is a member of my gun club. Works out well when I see him for my annual eye exam, as he adjusts my prescription for shooting.

    .
    A law-abiding citizen should be able to carry his personal protection firearm anywhere that an armed criminal might go.

    Member VCDL, NRA

  21. #21
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838
    Quote Originally Posted by peter nap View Post
    No, a lot of them will go anyway. Many don't actually realize what's being done to us and many more have the "I don't have anything to hide" mentality......which is exactly why the Government is getting away with these things.
    People who think "I have nothing to hide" clearly have the notion that they have nothing to lose too....until they lose even more...then they cry

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •