Mount Sinai St. Luke’s sued following HIPPA ViolationThey’re being sued for faxing patient PHI to his employer, a reported HIPPA violation that has already resulted in an OCR HIPPA settlement. St. Luke’s impermissibly disclosed PHI of two identified patients when Spencer Cox staff members faxed one individual’s PHI to his workplace and the other individual’s PHI to an office at which he volunteered. The type of PHI involved was specifically information about HIV, AIDS, and mental health. They say the impermissible disclosures was breached. Despite admitting its wrongdoing and paying the government $387,000, they’re also getting sued for negligence and negligence infliction of emotional distress. Because the individual had not told the majority
It is our conclusion that there is today no factual justification for immunity in a case such as this, and that the principles of law, logic and intrinsic justice demand that the mantle of humanity must be withdrawn.” (Parker v. Port Huron Hospital, Michigan)
Learning from what Dr. Anna Pou had to face with the lawsuits she was dealing with makes me cringe. As Healthcare professionals, having to worry of possibly being sued for believing what is right for the patient or as a whole for the hospitals health is ridiculous. Healthcare professionals like Dr. Pou, have taken the Hippocratic oath, and one of the promises made within that oath is “first, do no harm”. Often time’s society look at courts cases as a battle versus two oppositions, but Dr. Pou’s case it is not. In her statements from national television she states saying her role was to ‘‘help’’ patients ‘‘through their pain,’’.
Schmeida, M. (2005). HIPAA of 1996: Just an Incremental Step in Reshaping Government. Retrieved January 25, 2011, from American Nursing Association Web Site: http://www.nursingworld.org
The flip side of the signing a confidentiality document under HIPAA policy healthcare officials many times has been frustrated because bounds they can’t cross. Many times family or friends who aren’t authorizes obtains valuable medical information are coming all hours of the day to ask for critical medical reason, the nurses, physicians and others officials bid my law not to get out information on the telephone, or in personal if the individual or individuals name aren’t on the privacy document. Having a ...
According to the report provided by the consultant, the employees at this facility were not taking precautions in safeguarding the patient’s health information. Therefore, the employees at this facility were in violation of the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPPA). It is important for employees to understand the form of technology being used and the precautions they must take to safeguard patient information.
This case presents a very delicate situation that presents many legal and ethical questions. Do you tell your brother his partner has HIV? I would tell my brother, but the how and when, may vary based on circumstance. From a professional ethical standpoint, it would be unethical to disclose the patient’s HIV status without consent. It would violate the patient’s right to confidentiality, as it is the patient’s choice whom information may be shared with (Beemsterboer, 2010, p. 50). It could also be argued that it is a violation of the principle of nonmaleficence. By providing the patient’s HIV status to people unbound by HIPAA, you are putting the patient at risk of discrimination. This could cause mental anguish or psychological issues, therefore, in essence, inflicting harm on the patient. The most valued application of nonmaleficence is, “One ought to not inflict harm” (Beemsterboer, 2010, p. 42). This would outweigh the ethical argument that you are also preventing harm to your brother, another less important application of nonmaleficence (Beemsterboer, 2010, p. 42). There is one professional ethical principle that I would argue was being applied. This being the principle of paternalism, stating that healthcare providers should do what they deem best for the patient according to their ability and judgment (Beemsterboer, 2010, p. 47). If the patient had a sexual encounter with the brother, and did not inform him of her HIV status, she may be arrested for reckless endangerment according to Pennsylvania law. A case where an HIV-positive person did not disclose their status to their sexual partner was brought before the Pennsylvania Superior Court. According to Pennsylvania law, “Disclosure of HIV status is a defense ag...
Identity theft has always been in the back of my mind whenever I use my debit card but I wasn’t too concerned about my health information until I learned about HIPAA. It is a very important set of rules and standards that protects our privacy.
I am in full agreement with the case law. Once Moses H. Cone Memorial Hospital sought after and received government funding. They are to be held to the same standards as any other business or organization, public or private. It is fair to say that Moses H. Cone Memorial Hospital benefited from grants comprised of tax funds. These tax funds were paid by all citizens, and the hospital used the facilities built with these funds to impose its own doctrines upon patients and physicians who did not share them.
1. What is the difference between Introduction Today, you have more reason than ever to care about the privacy of your medical information. This information was once stored in locked file cabinets and on dusty shelves in the medical records department. Your doctor(s) are the sole keeper of your physical and mental health information.
HIPAA is the federal Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996. The primary goal of the law is to make it easier for people to keep health insurance, protect the confidentiality and security of healthcare information ad help the healthcare industry control administrative costs. HIPAA stands for the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996. HIPAA was first introduced in 1996. It was made a law by the United States Congress and signed by President Bill Clinton. The HIPAA Privacy Rule protects an individual’s medical records and other personal health information.
In the case of Tomcik v. Ohio Dep’t of Rehabilitation & Correction, the main issue present was the medical negligence demonstrated by the staff of the medical clinic at the Ohio Department of Rehabilitation and Correction towards the inmate Tomcik. Specifically, nonfeasance, or the “failure to act, when there is a duty to act as a reasonably prudent person would in similar circumstances” (Pozgar, 2016, p. 192), was displayed when the employees at the medical clinic failed to give immediate medical attention to Tomcik when she continually signed the clinic list and “provided the reason she was requesting
In this topic I will be explaining the laws of HIPPA, I’ll be explaining the definition, the history of HIPPA, when HIPPA was founded, and which types of environments follow the HIPPA law. HIPPA stands for the (Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act). The U.S. HIPPA law was made in order the protect patients, coworkers, and other staff members private information such as, health insurance, social security information, health information, and other things of such. Each facility that follows the HIPPA law must sign a letter as proof that everyone that is a staff member of that facility made an agreement to follow the HIPPA law. HIPPA also protects the release of any documentation that may be given out when not supposed to. When following
Doctor Benny Waxman was a found to be an AIDS victim in 1991, he was a surgeon who practiced medicine but did not tell his patients he had AIDS. He died in 2012. After his death some people argue that his patient’s hold be told and others say that the surgeons AIDS status should not be disclosed to those he gave medical care. Should a patient disclose his/her AIDS status to the treating phasician, should the provider disclose his AIDS status to his patients? HIPPA privacy
This case involves a corporate response to AIDS in the workplace. The return to work of Paul Cronan, a person with AIDS, after a much publicized law suit, led to a walkout of his coworkers. This case documents the circumstances which preceded the work stoppage. Analyzing this case from Paul Cronan’s supervisors point of view there are three main ethical issues to be considered: duty to protect the interests of the company, New England Telephone (NET); obligation to maintain the rights of the other employees; and duty to provide for the safety and privacy of Paul Cronan.
The sixth ethical issue arises when the client is denied access to his medical chart. Currently, HIPPA (2006) grants clients access to their medical records. An exception to this is if the information contained within the medical records is “reasonably likely” to cause harm to the client (HIPPA, 2006; APA, 2002). The records were unlikely to cause harm to the patient and, therefore, the client should have had access to them.