Education on Gun Laws Needed
Laws governing possession of firearms by individuals with a history of treatment for mental illness are complex and often confusing. Federal law mandates the loss of the right to possess firearms after a formal commitment to involuntary inpatient treatment. Given that psychiatrists are the most likely to effectuate such commitments, it is reasonable to expect us to have knowledge of the basics of mental health firearm laws. Unfortunately, two recently published papers demonstrate that most psychiatrists’ knowledge of this topic is inadequate. (See “Your Liberty or Your Gun? A Survey of Psychiatrist Understanding of Mental Health Prohibitors,” posted here, and “Knowledge and Attitudes of Psychiatrists About the Gun Rights of Persons With Mental Illness,” posted here.)
Letters to the Editor
Readers are invited to submit letters of not more than 350 words for possible publication. Psychiatric News reserves the right to edit letters and publish them in any of its formats—print, electronic, or other media. Receipt of letters is not acknowledged. Letters should be emailed to [email protected]. Clinical opinions are not peer reviewed and thus should be independently verified.
The Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education should mandate didactics on mental health firearm laws in psychiatry residency. Even before that happens, residency educators should begin introducing their residents to the subject. Potential errors range from providing wrong information to patients, to adjusting decisions about whether to voluntarily or involuntarily hospitalize based on a misunderstanding of applicable laws, to producing a poorly reasoned report in restoration of rights cases. Such reports could lead to wrong and unjust outcomes.
There has been increasing focus on the link between firearms and suicide and the potential relationship between mental illness and horrifying acts of violence such as mass shootings. Although these constitute an extremely small percentage of crimes committed with firearms, they capture the popular imagination and add to stigma. While we can debate the merits of mental health firearm laws, they are unlikely to change dramatically or disappear in the years ahead. Because of the politically charged nature of the issue, we are obligated to have a working knowledge of the nexus between mental health and firearm possession. With patients’ rights as well as safety at stake, the profession of psychiatry should not be content to remain ignorant of these laws.
JOE SIMPSON, M.D., PH.D.
Los Angeles, Calif.
