Question About ccl applicant

[beko55t]

I have personal knowledge that an applicant has a disqualifying event or condition. Do I notify the Texas DPS or let them sort it out. If it helps, it is regards to a psychiatric disorder. I am having a moral struggle over this.

[jayinsat]

I don't know the law but if this is about getting back at an ex then stay out. I say that respectfully. However, if you know something that likely will put the gen pub at risk then You have a moral obligation to report. Again, don't destroy a persons constitutional right unless you're sure it's a real threat.

Lastly, if you're a believer, pray about it and let the Holy Spirit lead you.

Blessings.

[Gameover]

If it puts the public in danger then you need to speak up.

[flechero]

Can you provide any context? I ask because I am generally of the opinion that if the mandated checks don't DQ a person then we shouldn't either... because our opinions aren't a legal diagnosis. (and according to many libs- just the desire to carry might be "a reason to drop a dime.") So I'm very cautious on the topic.

Thanks,
flechero

[beko55t]

Can you provide any context? I ask because I am generally of the opinion that if the mandated checks don't DQ a person then we shouldn't either... because our opinions aren't a legal diagnosis. (and according to many libs- just the desire to carry might be "a reason to drop a dime.") So I'm very cautious on the topic.

Thanks,
flechero

Just know that they have had a history (several occurrences) of mental treatment and not sure of an actual diagnosis just a history of this type of problems. Possibly even medication to control moods.

[Jumping Frog]

Just know that they have had a history (several occurrences) of mental treatment and not sure of an actual diagnosis just a history of this type of problems. Possibly even medication to control moods.

That is nowhere near enough information for you to insert yourself. Just because someone has had unspecified treatment or possibly had unspecified medication does not necessarily mean they are disqualified. I'd suggest MYOB.

[TexasGal]

The DPS is not going to deny a license unless this person's diagnosis/history meets the legal guidelines set forth in the law for serious mental illness. They do not do it lightly nor for things that are minor. A person who needs meds to control mood may have one of those listed mental illnesses or may not. If he has been treated in a hospital and it was not a voluntary admission, that is of concern. If you inform the DPS, it will not be your call that causes a denial of this person's license, but the facts they find out as a result of investigation and even then, the decision can be appealed to a medical board.

[beko55t]

The DPS is not going to deny a license unless this person's diagnosis/history meets the legal guidelines set forth in the law for serious mental illness. They do not do it lightly nor for things that are minor. A person who needs meds to control mood may have one of those listed mental illnesses or may not. If he has been treated in a hospital and it was not a voluntary admission, that is of concern. If you inform the DPS, it will not be your call that causes a denial of this person's license, but the facts they find out as a result of investigation and even then, the decision can be appealed to a medical board.

So, if I understand this correctly. The DPS has the means to determine if an applicant has a disqualifying condition whether or not one discloses a disqualification on his/her application. If this is the case I can rest at night knowing that they have vetted the applicant and are issuing permits to people that meet the requirements. I will, as suggested, MMOB.

[longtooth]

He will sign a release of medical history just like you did. They will find it.

[nightmare]

I am having a moral struggle over this.

So you decided to join an internet forum and on your first day ask a bunch of strangers to be your moral compass?

OK. Whatever, but I hope you're aware of the penalties for violating the HIPAA Privacy Rule.

[Keith B]

I am having a moral struggle over this.

So you decided to join an internet forum and on your first day ask a bunch of strangers to be your moral compass?

OK. Whatever, but I hope you're aware of the penalties for violating the HIPAA Privacy Rule.

HIPAA would only apply if the individual was involved in providing the care professionally.

nd, this was a perfectly legitimate question to ask as others on the forum may have had to deal with a similar situation.

[nightmare]

nd didn't specify how he or she learned the applicant's medical history. If the rule doesn't apply in this case, it may apply to others on the forum, so it's a perfectly legitimate caution.

[beko55t]

I am having a moral struggle over this.

So you decided to join an internet forum and on your first day ask a bunch of strangers to be your moral compass?

OK. Whatever, but I hope you're aware of the penalties for violating the HIPAA Privacy Rule.

HIPAA would only apply if the individual was involved in providing the care professionally.

nd, this was a perfectly legitimate question to ask as others on the forum may have had to deal with a similar situation.

nightmare, not sure of the criticism for someone looking to "do the right thing". It would pain me tremendously if someone with knowledge didn't speak up and somebody got injured or worse (even if they were a stranger to me or a personal acquaintance to you.) But whatever. Yes, I joined this forum specifically to ask this question. Somebody ask that poor nurse in England the penalties for violating the HIPAA Privacy Rule. And as others have pointed out, this only applies to those providing the care not with me knowing you and your history. By "you", I am referring to the anonymous individual that prompted the question. What would you do? What would you hope I would do? Are the answers the same? WHATEVER

[emcee rib]

Somebody ask that poor nurse in England the penalties for violating the HIPAA Privacy Rule.

Why? If I have a question about American law, a medical professional in England is not who I go to for advice.

[TexasGal]

If the OP works in a medical setting and had access to the person's actual medical records and then divulged the person's name along with specific medical information here on the forum, then there would be a problem. He didn't. If your doctor thinks you are a danger to yourself or others, then he/she can contact the authorities. The DPS can be argued to satisfy that description in this instance. If the OP is just going on casually knowing this person, then HIPPA has nothing to do with it. It does not restrict your friends and neighbors from telling what they know about you. It only restricts what people in the chain of access of your actual medical records can do with them.

He is just trying to do the right thing and we should all be glad after tragedies like Colorado. What do we think the news would have been happy to concentrate on if that crazy person had also had a CHL?