Arizona established the Child Fatality Review Program (CFRP) in the mid-1990s to review every single child fatality in the state, to analyze the data, and make recommendations to prevent every preventable death. The program has been publishing an annual report for almost 3 decades. It’s a commendable and noble goal, but how does the goal translate into practice? This year’s annual report (archived link) leaves a lot to be desired if you appreciate the Bill of Rights. 

The report found that in the year 2023, there were a total of 68 firearms-related child deaths in Arizona, which constituted 8% of all child deaths. (Go to Page 64). Using a common measure, this translates to 4.1 child deaths per 100,000 children. That’s 0.0041% of all Arizona children. Of those total firearms-related child deaths, 35% were suicides (~24 deaths) while 59% were homicides (~40 deaths), and the remaining 6% (~4 deaths) were undetermined or accidental. When you step back and look at the bigger picture, firearms suicides are 0.0014% of all Arizona children, and homicides are 0.0024%. Assuming that all undetermined deaths were accidental, that’s 0.0002% of all Arizona children.

The CFR report also lists the risk factors (See Page 68) involved in child firearms-related deaths. The top 3 risk factors, which are very close to each other as a percentage are:

Access to Firearm (User less than 18 years) – 60%
CPS History with the Family – 59%
Substance Use – 56%

Going further down the list, the next 2 risk factors are:

History of Trauma/Violence – 46%
Unlocked Firearm – 40%

Page 69 of the report lists the “user of the firearm.” Topping the list is “Self” at 44%, which tracks but doesn’t exactly match the sum of suicide (35%) and undetermined/accidental causes (6%). 

The remaining “firearm users” are strangers (21%), friends/acquaintances (18%), relatives (10%), and others – including gang rivals and law enforcement (9%). 

Page 70 shows that Drug Deal/Criminal Activity accounts for 15% of child firearm injury deaths.

Given how complicated the underlying factors are when it comes to firearms-related deaths, the report makes some outrageous recommendations to supposedly prevent these deaths. 

Their recommendations start on Page 111. They are addressed to parents, healthcare providers and facilities, policy makers, state agencies, schools, and community-based organizations. They include: 

Increase awareness that the most effective way to prevent firearm-related deaths in children and adolescents is to remove all firearms in households.^70–72

[…] The presence of firearms in a household increases the risk of suicide among adolescents. Parents of all adolescents should remove all firearms, especially if there is a history of mental health issues or substance use issues.

• Gun owners should practice safe storage of their firearms, which requires keeping the gun unloaded and locked in a safe separate from the ammunition.

I looked up citations 70–72 on page 155. They’re standard fare from meddlesome doctors who think a white lab coat and a stethoscope makes them an authority on public policy. Every preventable child death is a tragedy, but in the larger scheme of things with a 0.0041% child death rate, these doctors want all parents to remove all firearms from their homes? And if you insist on keeping guns at home, they want them stored in a way that would delay their use in a defensive situation? That delay cost lives in Sutherland Springs.

The CFR report recommendations to policymakers is even more rankling:

The state should implement policies, programs, and initiatives focused on responsible firearm access and ownership in households with children. This could include:^{104, 105}

• Requiring mental health screening and gun safety training as part of the firearm purchasing process
• Licensing and tracking firearm ownership

Mental health screening can and will be abused. History stands as evidence. Some younger readers may not know this, but there used to be a country called the Soviet Union, where political dissenters were pathologized as mentally ill. In the United States, there’s a common saying that dissent is patriotic. In the Soviet Union, dissent was psychiatric.

Licensing and tracking the ownership of firearms is an absolute non-starter. Putting gun owners on a government naughty list is a gun controller fever dream, but again, history is rife with examples of how gun owner registries are abused by tyrants. Venezuela is the most recent example.

What makes these recommendations so grating is that the Child Fatality Review Program falls under the Arizona Department of Health Services, and is funded by taxpayer dollars.

The report has a lot of other causes of injury, including drowning, dog attacks, and other suicide methods, such as suffocation. The report does not say anything about removing pools from all homes with children, euthanizing Fido, or getting rid of ropes or knives if you have a child at home. It singles out gun ownership.

These recommendations, in my opinion, are the result of groupthink, and a lack of not just common sense but also an eye towards constitutionality and legality. Two Republican state lawmakers – Rep. Quang Nguyen and Rep. Selina Bliss – reacted to the report and made rightful condemnations of the recommendations. 

“We are appalled that the CFRT, speaking on behalf of the Arizona Department of Health Services, is actually advocating for stripping Arizonans of their Second Amendment rights in their own homes. This radical proposal is reminiscent of New Mexico Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham’s 2023 gun control order, which attempted to prohibit carrying of firearms in public for self-defense. You may recall that Governor Grisham’s order—accurately characterized as ‘insanely unconstitutional’ and ‘outrageous’—was swiftly blocked in court.

“The CFRT’s ‘do something’ approach to child-fatality legislation would not only violate the constitutional rights of millions of Arizonans; it is also irrational from a policy perspective. The CFRT’s Report notes that 31 children drowned in 2023 and that the majority of these deaths occurred in pools and hot tubs. Yet the CFRT does not recommend the elimination of pools and hot tubs. Instead, the CFRT advocates for common-sense ideas: ‘close, constant supervision of children when around water, increased availability and affordability of swim lessons for children, and proper pool enclosures.’

“Effective policy solutions—even for problems that are difficult and complex—must be designed to fully protect constitutional rights and liberties. We urge you to direct the CFRT to reconsider its unjustified attack on the Second Amendment and amend its Report.”

How is the media reacting to the GOP lawmaker reaction? As expected, the themes range from “Republicans pounce!” to “Republicans don’t care” to neglecting the outrageous recommendations like licensing and “tracking” gun ownership.

Here’s Laurie Roberts with a headline titled, “Lawmakers choose guns over the Arizona kids who are dying by them.” 

A state report says fewer Arizona kids would die if they had no access to guns. Two state lawmakers are furious and demanding action to protect, well … https://t.co/t1Cuy3MXgB via @azcentral

— Laurie Roberts (@LaurieRoberts) January 7, 2025

And then there’s this emotional “Republicans pounce!” piece by Caitlin Sievers, which isn’t explicitly listed as an opinion, so it’s an opinion wolf in a news sheep clothing:

Republicans balk at child fatality report recommending no guns in households with children

Two Republican state representatives have accused the Arizona Department of Health Services of coming after the Second Amendment rights of parents after the agency concluded in its annual Child Fatality Review Team report that there would be fewer children killed by guns in Arizona if there were fewer firearms in homes. 

[…]

Far from advocating for “stripping Second Amendment rights,” as the Republicans claimed, the report says that lawmakers “should implement policies, programs, and initiatives focused on responsible firearm access and ownership in households with children.”  

Some examples of that include: 

Requiring mental health screening and gun safety training for firearm purchasers
Licensing and tracking firearm ownership

The irony of saying that the report doesn’t advocate stripping Second Amendment rights and then listing prior restraint and a gun owners registry is lost on Ms. Sievers.

The following is a much better article written by Paola Rodriguez at Arizona Public Media: “Lawmakers condemn child fatality report’s call to remove guns from households with children”  If you want to spend time reading some reasonably balanced, I recommend this article, although I’m miffed that “Lawmakers condemn” has a “Republicans pounce!” feel to it, and the article mentions nothing about the licensing and “tracking” schemes listed in the recommendations.

So there you have it – a taxpayer-funded agency releases a questionable report, lawmakers concerned about it make a statement, and the media distorts and misreports the whole debacle. It’s how the world operates these days.