Physician groups last month filed a brief in support of a formal petition for the rehearing of a precedent-setting case. A federal appellate court earlier this summer issued a split-decision upholding a controversial Florida law that could restrict what physicians can talk about with their patients in the exam room.
The state law bars physicians from freely discussing firearm safety with their patients, putting political agendas before public health and the patient-physician relationship. While one of the judges on the three-person panel sided strongly with physicians in opposing the law, the two other judges ruled in favor of the state.
“[T]he panel decision … denigrates the practice of medicine,” the AMA and eight medical specialty societies wrote in the filing. “To be effective, [medicine] requires a special bond of trust between patient and physician, which depends for its existence on the ability to communicate freely.”
“Patients must believe in their physicians’ absolute honesty and fidelity when relying on their physicians’ advice,” the filing said. Furthermore, “if physicians must tailor their communications to meet a legislative agenda, they cannot fully respect their patients’ needs.”
The medical associations are pointing to the “exceptional importance of this case.” The ruling not only has direct negative consequences on the practice of medicine in Florida but also sets a precedent that could encourage other state lawmakers to proceed with legislation that similarly would restrict physicians’ conversations with their patients about health and safety.
Learn more about how the Litigation Center of the AMA and State Medical Societies is standing up for physicians and patients in the nation’s courts.
