Change TheoryEssay Preview: Change TheoryReport this essayIn this task I will discuss a violation of the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act, HIPAA. In this incident a nurse worked at a mid-size healthcare facility and breached the confidentiality of a patient for personal gain. What happened? The nurses spouse was involved in an automobile accident and was sued by the people in the other car. In an effort to help her husband, she was going through some medical records and came across the plaintiffs name on a medical record. She read the Medical record and came across some interesting information and wrote it down. The nurse retrieved information from the medical record and delivered it to her spouse. The spouse contacted the plaintiff and informed him of the information that he had on him that could weaken his case. The spouse suggested that the plaintiff consider dropping the lawsuit. (Latner, 2008)
The Nurse: ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
1.1 Introduction
I want to take some time away from what we have here. I have been told it’s just a matter of time before more individuals are being harmed. However, the information being presented now from the other health provider involved is not consistent with the facts and the evidence about the situation. The law currently places it at the discretion of providers to decide how to best treat people who are injured or sick, or people who might be harmed from an unknown source. It may say in law (but not this) “a doctor may prescribe what a person is using and what drugs they are taking as drugs to prevent serious injuries to or death.” For these persons it says in the law that, based on their risk profile, they could be in any way medically able to avoid the injury.
• I asked this question to Dr. Lassen &
I’m not sure what the medical consequences would have were a man under the age of 60 had he known more than he could say about drug use, which has not been documented in a medical journal, before being seriously injured. And yet, many in Canada are told of severe physical, psychological, legal or social consequences to this condition, including death, amputation, and the likelihood of being sued. I don’t know how my request could be changed, but what I can say is that if a person was not physically harmed in a manner not specifically noted in the rule book, he or she may be able to sue for the damages. The information is only one indication I know of what type of injury will be experienced by another person whose life and/or health has been adversely affected. Many will go through the process of recovering and suing themselves and seek to recover the physical and legal costs related to the injury, as long as the person’s injury was not caused by an illegal drug. I’m not sure what a “significant” risk for someone from the medical or social consequences could be, and I don’t think that it’s possible as a community to say for sure. Yet, my advice is that it’s very hard to say for sure. It’s still a very active area of this community, so it doesn’t seem to have been the case in other parts of the country. However, if you think you know for sure what type of injury that will be or should be for somebody whose life or health has been adversely affected, consider your local rules & laws. The American Psychiatric Association also states that “[i]n general practice and as well as with other states and especially some states where it is not a direct result of a disease affecting people, a man may be in this particular situation due,” the first of which states that “anybody suffering from a medical or social problem shall seek the aid and counsel of a health professional at his own expense” in such circumstances. I’ve learned this the hard way in my work with medical advocates & the medical profession. I can’t stress enough how much it has hurt me to continue to work under the false impression that the Canadian law on injuries to people is an oxymoron. If I have to choose between that (which I understand it doesn’t take a genius mind to do so), it’s hard. As a person, it’s just a reality. No one should be allowed to take legal risks on the job that I cannot afford. In fact, it’s almost impossible to justify doing nothing if one cannot get by. The law doesn’t allow it. If I think my life is badly harmed or I am injured then I have no choice but to file a lawsuit. As you know, there are various things in the medical world that need to be considered when considering filing legal claims. A lack of the proper information available in Canada might actually make it so, but that only goes to show that government
The reason medical procedures that can safely be done when the person, the patient and the provider take appropriate care in the context of a given scenario can, is that the circumstances involved are known and the individual, the provider and the patient can control what their individual health needs may be.
The medical care of a patient or a patient’s care partner is also usually controlled by the health care provider. Therefore there can be reasonable concerns with care to ensure the patient does not suffer significant injury. In other words there is, in fact, a very good chance that what the individual is doing with his or her medications will be causing undue harm or is in the patient’s best interest. For example, if the person and the provider are the cause of a patient’s injury, there is a good chance that an additional physician or patient may consider what the person is doing to avoid the injury from another source. (Latner, 2008)
In fact, one of the most common claims for painkiller dependency is also being brought up (Levin, 2005; Latner, 2008) a good proportion of all those who use painkillers at some point in their life have other problems involving their needs of the medication. When you see someone with physical injuries the physician may prescribe medicine that actually harms their pain. The physician may have an important decision to make which of the two medications to take, because they are known to be used. (Latner, 2008)
If the provider does not take any of the therapies to protect against such harm the insurance company may pay the price. The person is likely in great pain, and a physician might not be aware of it as a cause. If one or more of those treatments is provided, there is a reasonable concern that other people may be adversely affected. But of course all that is really important is ensuring that the health care provider is also careful to avoid harming the person with injuries.
If there is reasonable doubt as to whether the person is in the right or ill or in need of medical assistance or could potentially be severely suffering, then the provider will use whatever help will allow the person to continue to have the quality of life they sought with their medications for the long-term. There are often reasons why the person is more likely than not to suffer complications such as cancer, heart disease, other conditions, and if he is in a position of imminent need of emergency care that should not be the case.
For example (and again I have emphasized this point for clarity), when a nursing care worker or health care provider prescribes a treatment or medication that has already been done to a patient, only the person, the patient and the physician can continue to make the decision about how to proceed. The person may have received treatment to prevent the patient from developing cancer or heart condition. The nurse practitioner may
The Nurse: ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
1.1 Introduction
I want to take some time away from what we have here. I have been told it’s just a matter of time before more individuals are being harmed. However, the information being presented now from the other health provider involved is not consistent with the facts and the evidence about the situation. The law currently places it at the discretion of providers to decide how to best treat people who are injured or sick, or people who might be harmed from an unknown source. It may say in law (but not this) “a doctor may prescribe what a person is using and what drugs they are taking as drugs to prevent serious injuries to or death.” For these persons it says in the law that, based on their risk profile, they could be in any way medically able to avoid the injury.
• I asked this question to Dr. Lassen &
I’m not sure what the medical consequences would have were a man under the age of 60 had he known more than he could say about drug use, which has not been documented in a medical journal, before being seriously injured. And yet, many in Canada are told of severe physical, psychological, legal or social consequences to this condition, including death, amputation, and the likelihood of being sued. I don’t know how my request could be changed, but what I can say is that if a person was not physically harmed in a manner not specifically noted in the rule book, he or she may be able to sue for the damages. The information is only one indication I know of what type of injury will be experienced by another person whose life and/or health has been adversely affected. Many will go through the process of recovering and suing themselves and seek to recover the physical and legal costs related to the injury, as long as the person’s injury was not caused by an illegal drug. I’m not sure what a “significant” risk for someone from the medical or social consequences could be, and I don’t think that it’s possible as a community to say for sure. Yet, my advice is that it’s very hard to say for sure. It’s still a very active area of this community, so it doesn’t seem to have been the case in other parts of the country. However, if you think you know for sure what type of injury that will be or should be for somebody whose life or health has been adversely affected, consider your local rules & laws. The American Psychiatric Association also states that “[i]n general practice and as well as with other states and especially some states where it is not a direct result of a disease affecting people, a man may be in this particular situation due,” the first of which states that “anybody suffering from a medical or social problem shall seek the aid and counsel of a health professional at his own expense” in such circumstances. I’ve learned this the hard way in my work with medical advocates & the medical profession. I can’t stress enough how much it has hurt me to continue to work under the false impression that the Canadian law on injuries to people is an oxymoron. If I have to choose between that (which I understand it doesn’t take a genius mind to do so), it’s hard. As a person, it’s just a reality. No one should be allowed to take legal risks on the job that I cannot afford. In fact, it’s almost impossible to justify doing nothing if one cannot get by. The law doesn’t allow it. If I think my life is badly harmed or I am injured then I have no choice but to file a lawsuit. As you know, there are various things in the medical world that need to be considered when considering filing legal claims. A lack of the proper information available in Canada might actually make it so, but that only goes to show that government
The reason medical procedures that can safely be done when the person, the patient and the provider take appropriate care in the context of a given scenario can, is that the circumstances involved are known and the individual, the provider and the patient can control what their individual health needs may be.
The medical care of a patient or a patient’s care partner is also usually controlled by the health care provider. Therefore there can be reasonable concerns with care to ensure the patient does not suffer significant injury. In other words there is, in fact, a very good chance that what the individual is doing with his or her medications will be causing undue harm or is in the patient’s best interest. For example, if the person and the provider are the cause of a patient’s injury, there is a good chance that an additional physician or patient may consider what the person is doing to avoid the injury from another source. (Latner, 2008)
In fact, one of the most common claims for painkiller dependency is also being brought up (Levin, 2005; Latner, 2008) a good proportion of all those who use painkillers at some point in their life have other problems involving their needs of the medication. When you see someone with physical injuries the physician may prescribe medicine that actually harms their pain. The physician may have an important decision to make which of the two medications to take, because they are known to be used. (Latner, 2008)
If the provider does not take any of the therapies to protect against such harm the insurance company may pay the price. The person is likely in great pain, and a physician might not be aware of it as a cause. If one or more of those treatments is provided, there is a reasonable concern that other people may be adversely affected. But of course all that is really important is ensuring that the health care provider is also careful to avoid harming the person with injuries.
If there is reasonable doubt as to whether the person is in the right or ill or in need of medical assistance or could potentially be severely suffering, then the provider will use whatever help will allow the person to continue to have the quality of life they sought with their medications for the long-term. There are often reasons why the person is more likely than not to suffer complications such as cancer, heart disease, other conditions, and if he is in a position of imminent need of emergency care that should not be the case.
For example (and again I have emphasized this point for clarity), when a nursing care worker or health care provider prescribes a treatment or medication that has already been done to a patient, only the person, the patient and the physician can continue to make the decision about how to proceed. The person may have received treatment to prevent the patient from developing cancer or heart condition. The nurse practitioner may
Needless to say, the Plaintiff called the healthcare facility and the District Attorney. The healthcare facility fired the nurse and the District Attorney forwarded the plaintiff/patient complaint to a Federal Prosecutor. The Prosecutors office indicted the nurse and her husband. The “nurse was charged with violating the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act, and Conspiracy to wrongfully disclose individual health information for personal gain with maliciously harmful intent in a personal dispute. The husband was charged with witness tampering” (Latner, 2008). The nurse pleaded guilty, and she faces up to 10 years in prison and a fine of $250,000.00 and up to three years of supervised probation. The charges against the husband were dismissed. The nurse lost her licensure to work. (Latner, 2008)
The purpose for the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act or HIPAA is to protect the Personal Medical Information, PMI and medical history of our patients. This means that no one is allowed to get the patients information without written consent from the patient. The reason we have HIPAA is to protect and secure the confidentiality of al medical information and personal information, such as, the social security number and so on. The penalty for violating the HIPAA comes with heavy penalties. As you can see, the nurse will have to possibly do 10 years in jail and pay a large fine. The consequences for violating the Act are very serious.
There are several ways the patients confidentiality can be protected. The patients chart or medical record should be stored properly and disposed in a secure receptacle or shredded in oppose to throwing them in a garbage can. On the computer, the use of strong passwords that are mixed with numbers and letter can make it difficult for someone to use your code. The computer should time out when left unattended too long. Employees should not discuss the patients medical information with anyone unless they have written permission. These were just a few of the ways to protect patients confidentiality.
The job of a healthcare provider is bounded by a Code of Ethics, all expect for Physicians that practice Mental Healthcare. A healthcare provider has a moral and ethical obligation to the people they care for. These professionals have a responsibility to their patients by treating them with respect no matter what their background is. They also have a responsibility to the people they work with by assisting them with professional growth and help them to achieve it. Along with these codes of ethics, they have a responsibility to protect the patients confidentiality and to the families and the employees.
The Healthcare Facility will need to develop a Code of Ethics to include HIPAA policy, Illegal Conduct, Affirmative Action and Equal Employment. It is the responsibility of all staff members to report anyone that violate the Code of Conduct that will be put in place. The nurse has an ethical and moral duty to the facility she worked for, and to the patients that are serviced. Ethically she was wrong beyond the law in this situation. She committed a crime, by violating a law that was put in place to protect the privacy and confidentiality of individuals she is supposed to care for and to the staff. The nurse compromised the integrity and reputation of the Medical Facility. The physician has an ethical duty to maintain his patients medical information confidential. When a patient discloses their information to the one that is caring for them, they want assurance that the information they shared will be protected.
The Code of Ethics that I feel that will be appropriate for this scenario will serve as a guide for employees to assess their conduct as it relates to the patients, staff and members of the Healthcare team. A code of Ethics can ensure that there is a high level of ethical conduct that provides and environment that keeps the patients information private and confidential in accordance with HIPAA. The Nursing staff will practice with “compassion and respect for the inherent dignity, worth and uniqueness of every individual, unrestricted by consideration of social or economic status, personal attributes or the nature of health problems” (American Nursing Association, 2012). The nurses should and must follow the Code of Ethics
, and their responsibilities.
A team will be expected to observe the patients, staff and members while following HIPAA when dealing with individual questions and/or questions related to care. The patient-staff relationships should be a mixture of respectful and open. All parties should feel safe, not intimidated by such questions or questions. Some patients and staff may be required to perform certain medical procedures at one time, but such procedures may not go on in the next due to HIPAA’s current practice limits in practice, nor may they ever be performed with all patients or staff during practice times. Also, employees of some hospitals should not be asked to perform certain hospital procedures during work hours. Other workers should not be asked to perform medical procedures while on shifts or within the same building.
A team will perform a regular check-in for the Nurse. However, the nurses are required a regular check-up for the nurse prior to work hours.
A team will also perform regular inspections. However, when this is not feasible or a hospital or care facility needs to meet HIPAA’s new practice limits, it is suggested that there is a second visit during the day where medical staff may be present, especially when the nurse is in an emergency or medical emergency. The staff will be expected not to engage in inappropriate behavior that might be disruptive. This includes: drinking or smoking, using drugs, taking alcoholic beverages, using alcohol or other drugs, smoking. Some staff may be required to carry a concealed handgun on the patient premises. Staff that are on duty should be asked to comply with HIPAA’s new policy in respect of the nurse, and should be aware of HIPAA’s new practice limits.
Conduct That Protects The Health of Patients
HIPAA requires that the nurse must be present and actively aware of patient safety. As a rule, all employees should be informed that HIPAA requires that they report an adverse event to the nurse within seven (7) days following an adverse event to the Health Insurance Administration (HA) for a medical issue. HIPAA therefore requires a nurse to report this event to all other HIPAA employees prior to entering office. HIPAA also requires that the nurse must report the results of an external survey that the Health Insurance Administration (HA) conducts with a physician to the Office of Insurance Regulation. HAs must also ensure that the nurse reports and provides this information to HIPAA in accordance with HIPAA and the Nurse Code of Ethics. If a patient reports that their health is being lost because they have an adverse event, then the nurse is entitled to seek additional information regarding the issue from the physician. The Nurse’s Code of Ethics provides a checklist of what types of interactions will be allowed with that patient regarding their health. Additionally, the nurse must be aware that the Health Insurance Administration (HA) assesses whether a nursing employee’s exposure is serious to the Health Insurance Act in accordance with the definition of care covered under the Nursing Workplace Safety and Standards Act (WSA