The Mother of all Medical Reports

In the wake of a shooting-spree tragedy in Antwerp the Belgian government sought to toughen gun control laws. But how? By allowing firearms possession only by permit, for which a medical report is required. A Belgian physician, though tongue-in-cheek, addresses the serious issue of mingling medicine and law.

The Mother of all Medical Reports

James Dockx, 007,
no license to kill

Many a doctor’s visit is wrapped up by the physician handing over some or other obscure filled-in questionnaire or written statement to the patient. Recently I happened upon the application form for a gun licence, a pearl of its kind, reaching a rare level of ludicrousness. It is a great asset to my collection of Stupid Documents (of which the previous one was a medical statement confirming non-smoking for the purpose of papal dispensation).

On the face of it, the gun license form seems innocent enough: the family physician declares that the applicant is physically and mentally fit to use a firearm. However, originally he [the physician] was unqualified or incompetent to do so, as article 14 clause 1 of the law which came into effect in 2006 stipulates that the physician must be “recognized” by the Minister of Justice. What could such recognition entail? Which training or skills are required? Is priority given to physicians who themselves engage in shooting? Or has this law been hastily patched together? No doubt there is a shortage of “recognized” physicians, and the good old family doctor, that faithful handyman, will once again be taken off the shelf and enlisted in the war against terrorism and gun violence. What a huge social role is accorded to him.

The Medical Report

I signed proudly, knowing that thanks to me, this man will be allowed to safely use a gun. For a moment I experienced the sweet taste of power, so inherent to politics. At that time I had not yet flipped the application form over, so the raw truth had not yet dissipated my sweet dream.

In article 5.6.1 clause A knowledge of the gun laws is taken for granted although several pages of Babylonian speech confusion follow. Clause B stipulates that the physician is to determine (as though he is erudite on this subject) whether the gun could potentially endanger the applicant himself or others. Would it not be more logical to first inspect the gun? Is it a pistol or a kalashnikov? What will it be used for? Are people with congenital criminal tendencies disqualified? And how can the family physician identify a gangster?

Back to the front. Our erudite expert has determined according to the prevailing criteria that __________ is physically able. Personally, my view is that anyone who can use a knife and fork is physically able. Is the physician supposed to examine the applicant’s limbs? Is asthma an impairment to a prolonged chase? Could bifocal vision cause unnecessary victims? The answer appears in a footnote on the other side: “Note that certain firearms are employed in the rehabilitation of the less-abled. This form of ownership does not pose a special problem for the public order.” Apparently the criteria don’t count here. But for heaven’s sake, what kind of occupational therapist uses firearms in the rehabilitation of his patients?

Physical Fitness

Okay, our man is physically fit to own a firearm, which after all applies to the majority of the population. But that’s not enough, he also has to be mentally fit. The instructions for determining this are included in clause 5.6.4 “Applicant’s Personality”. The applicant is to be asked the following questions:

Have you ever committed an act of violence in your family or elsewhere?
Have you ever been in trouble with the law?
Have you used your firearm exclusively for killing lower mammals?
Are you mentally unstable?
Do you commit adultery, pedophilia, or incest?
Are you a violent political activist (no mention of soccer hooliganism)?
Are you involved in heavy spousal conflicts? And finally:
Are you often inebriated?

Naturally the accuracy and honesty of the applicant’s answers can be relied upon. And the superiority of the physician’s eye to that of the policeman's can be assumed as well, in spite of the latter having access to the criminal records of every citizen.

Suppose the applicant answers one of the above questions affirmatively. Is this considered included in the confidentiality of the confessional? And what if he already owns a firearm that has to be legalized posteriori by the family physician? Kafka!

Buffalo Bill

In article 83 of the Schengen agreement (Take note of my knowledgeability!) the legislator refers to mental illness, mental and physical disability, danger to public order and security, etc.

I take you back to Side A of the application form. Our man is pronounced physically and mentally fit “to own firearms, practice target sports, and/or carry a weapon”. Is the physician supposed to cross out whatever doesn’t apply? Does “fit to carry a weapon” mean carrying it with or without firing it off? Perhaps the legislator is referring to a toy pistol? Perhaps this clause applies to the Buffalo Bills in the Wild Western villages scattered willy-nilly throughout the province of Antwerp?

Finally, some medico-legal ponderings. Suppose that in my medical report, I failed to recognize a psychopath. Or I underestimated a depression or spousal feud. What will be my liability? Could I be sued? I was assured orally that such a thing will never happen.

Such a medical report could be an inspiration for other organizations. Perhaps it is not unthinkable that Gaia the pet lover would also set up requirements for physical and mental fitness.

Nonetheless the shooting sports organizations in 1992 proposed requiring licenses for all gun ownership. The powerful hunters' organizations are the ones who opposed this proposal for obscure tax reasons.

In the end the legislator chose an inexpensive umbrella system. What family physician will charge for a medical report without medical examination, which from the viewpoint of the patient clearly is included in the services he is entitled to expect from the health care system?

The author, Jan Dockx, is a family physician working in a group practice in Deurne, a subdivision of Antwerp. He is also on the board of directors of the Flemish Physicians’ Union, the Union of Flemish Medical Scientific Societies, and a member of the Flemish Journalism Society. If you wish to compliment him on this article, please remove the asterisk from his e-mail address.

MeTZelf wishes to thank Dr. Dockx for his permission to translate and publish his article on our website.