the problem is that this is a violation of privacy
Posted By: dnh on 2009-05-04
In Reply to: And folks think I'm paranoid - MTTwo
Hope you don't think it is okay to have your family members looking in on your computer while you are working!!
Complete Discussion Below:  marks the location of current message within thread
The messages you are viewing
are archived/old.
To view latest messages and participate in discussions, select
the boards given in left menu
Other related messages found in our database
No you should not tell. I do believe it is a violation of privacy since you are doing the report.
The guy has to do what he has to do obviously to exist with his sorry self.
Violation
First of all, best wishes for a full recovery from your breast CA. Most of us have been in this MTs position in typing reports on people we know or work with. One thing to consider is that she probably was not the only one to see the report. Who faxed the report to the doctor? Who prints out the reports? I worked inhouse and have heard some inappropriate remarks made by non-MT personnel. In this case, the coworker may simply find herself in an awkward position. She also may just not know what to say to you. I have learned some tragic things through my work about people I knew, but because of the way I learned it could not discuss it, even with that person. Also, the MD I use is a client of the small MTSO I work for, so I always was aware that the MT saw my records, as well other office personnel involved in getting the records printed and to the physician. That is just part of working in the medical field.
It's not a HIPAA violation for sure. Can you
have the account use digital recorders that are uploaded to your FTP site? Bypass the TASP entirely. Or if you are the only transcriptionist, you can use Bytescribe's E-shuttle. Check it out at bytescribe.com
I agree it's a violation. m
I mean, even if you have stellar credit, it still gives a whole lot of information. I've seen my credit report so I know that any open loans, credit cards, etc. are all on there with limits, current balance, account numbers as would be your mortgage and the monthly amount you pay. I have a student loan from 15 years ago and cc's from that long ago or longer as well that have been closed for over a decade that still linger. I mean, it's just nobody's business unless you're applying for credit. If you want a job, they should look at your job history. If you want credit, look at your credit history.
really the only violation is if they hear it and use it in some way that hurts you...
people keep thinking HIPAA violation is just knowing it. It's not. It also has to be harmful to the patient in some way. Remember this whole thing started because some stu*id pharm tech came home and told her high school kid that Mr. So and So came in and got AIDS medicine, then her stu*id high school kid went to school and told other kids and that is how Mr. So and So's daughter found out her father has AIDS.
And wasn't it a violation for her to even ASK for the results from someone other than her doc? Th
x
wouldn't this be HIPPA violation?
Just finished dictating an irritating doctor. Thought he was dictating on his cell phone, but turns out he was dictating on an airplane. Wouldn't that be a HIPPA violation?
Yeah and I think a cellphone is violation myself sm
I do plenty of QA and I note the cellphone usage for the client because of the numerous cutouts, static, distortions and other things that make it impossible to hear.
It may not be a HIPAA violation, but by golly it SHOULD BE.
Sorry, but major HIPPA violation to "keep a
little file...that's a HUGE industry NO-NO. Talk about lawsuits and professionalism!
She obviously told someone who warned her of the violation and now she is hiding....
dd
PHYSICIAN SUED FOR DELIBERATE HIPPA VIOLATION
Anyone know what the penalties are for docs violating HIPPA? I know of a case where a person was damaged from a new nonsurgical cosmetic procedure and about to settle with a company to pay for the surgical repair. Prior to the settlement this patient saw a physician who sells these same nonsurgical services with a possible financial interest in the company. This physician filled the patient's face full of temporary cosmetic fillers to cover the damage and then WITHOUT THE PATIENT'S PERMISSION released the patient's records to the company and wrote a letter stating there was nothing wrong with the patient. The company subsequently canceled the pending deal to pay for the damages. The temporary fillers wore off and the damage returned and this patient is now suing the company AND ALSO the physician that released her records. This physician has caused an already traumatized patient much more stress (a subsequent long legal battle) from this HIPPA violation. What are the penalties? Any criminal charges?
Thanks!!!
to the transcriptionists who felt that a criminal background check was a violation - sm
you will notice that some of the jobs posted on the job seeker's board require a CRIMINAL BACKGROUND CHECK!!! What do you think of that? Still think it's a violation of your privacy?
Let me get this straight. It is a copyright violation punishable if you copy and paste an article
but it is not a copyright violation if you copy and paste the link to the article? What the h*ll is the big deal?
all has to do with everyone's right to privacy--sm
and possible identity theft. We are not living *back before politically correct* any long and we need to protect ourselves in ALL areas of our lives, including the privacy of our medical records. Your grandparents' medical records and information are not yours to give away. That is up to them. Perhaps they do not want your child's school knowing all of their information. What if someone at that school happened to know those grandparents, found out about their medical history, and started blabbing it all over the place. This is what medical record privacy is for..to protect those that do not want it divulged to just anyone who asks for it. It may not bother you, but it bothers others, and that should be a protected right. This is just my take on privacy.
Enough with invasion of privacy
Its is all getting so frightening, the invasion by companies into peoples lives. I have worked at nine hospitals, two trans companies on-site, three trans companies at home and never have I had a background check OR drug screen. The policy for drug screening at the hospitals was if you seemed like you were under the influence your boss could request a drug screen but never happened to ME or any of my coworkers. Physical exam, sure I got those when I worked at the hospitals but they paid for the physical exam and they also covered me for insurance. The trans company I work for now does not provide medical coverage or life insurance coverage for statutory employees, so I dont see why they would be concerned about my health status. Lets face it, they are concerned with how much we can pound away each day and that is it. We get paid for what we produce. So under these circumstances, they dont need to be poking their nose IN my background, my urine or my physical body. If it is checking on my experience, well they already did that by talking to previous employers and coworkers and guess I passed the test, as I was hired.
I think they are violating your privacy
I'd check it out on the ALCU web site if you don't find anything regarding that there email them and ask about it... or Google in workplace privacy. I think they are way out of line when it is your personal computer and not theirs. If it's theirs they are within their rights
when privacy direct first came out.....sm
it only cost $2/month extra - today I think it costs $19.95 but to me it's worth it because #1 it cuts all telemarketer calls (and I have been on the Do Not Call list since that began) and I can also take my phone charges off my MTSO business at tax time......
call your phone company and ask them if they offer anything like Privacy Director. *S* 
Privacy question.
I do occasional IC work for a provider that I have known a while now. Today i did some work for her and found something that really bothers me. The physician dictates the patient's full name, street address and home phone number in addition to her DOB. Is that HIPPA compliant? I'm sorry folks but I really don't want my street address and phone number available across the internet even if it is "so called" secure. I would like your thoughts.
Privacy standards?
Who actually do you contact to report a breech of privacy standards in this business? I probably should know this by now, but I don't.
The HIPAA Privacy Rule...(sm)
...requires a covered entity to make "reasonable efforts to limit use, disclosure of, and requests for PHI to the minimum necessary to accomplish the intended purpose." The only AHA-approved HIPAA training program, HIPAA Academy, specifically states in its training materials that HIPAA intends that personal information be limited to document headers unless absolutely required I will quote page 4-56:
"In practice, we expect the minimum-necessary requirement to lead to compartmentalization of the medical record so that one portion of the record (the body of the report) may be readily disclosed for one purpose without compromising the privacy of the entire record."
By limiting PHI to headers, reports can easily be redacted of personal information; when the PHI is scattered throughout the reports, this information cannot be redacted.
HIPAA Privacy Rule
http://www.aafp.org/fpm/20021100/35theh.html
Not to make light of pt privacy, but
I type on a 14 inch laptop screen that I must keep about 2 feet away from my face in order to see it. In the course of seeing my laptop, my less than petite frame obscures probably the middle 50% of the screen. On the screen, there are endless lines of text that would be rather meaningless to the average barrista/customer. The patient demographics are obtained via a link on the toolbar. A 'hotkey' is entered throughout the report where the patient name appears and in the preparing-to-send process, these are all replaced with the patient's name. The hospital I type for is 3000 miles away.
I can see where this might be problematic should someone with better vision than I manage to see around my hulking slumped body and see 25% of the text on the left and 25% of the text on the right and know enough about transcription to be able to fill in those rather large blanks on each line (and that doesn't even take into account that most laptops are made to be viewed head-on; side viewing, viewing from above, etc., distort the picture to make it all but illegible). I suppose this could still be problematic if this eagle-eyed contortionist with an intuitive knowledge of medical terminology and knowledge of random software programs to find that demographic button can psychically detect which hospital of the thousands in the country I am working on and happens to have a relative who lives in that very town ready, willing, and eager to spill the beans about Madame X's bunion. Yes, I can see where this is a danger. I guess I should thank my lucky stars that I have not run into either this fellow or chupicabra at my local coffee house.
It does violate privacy or employment laws.
I've posted about it before because there were MTSOs trashing MTs by name on some of the boards. My mother is an HR director, so she's told me what companies legally can and can't divulge about employees or former employees. Companies are not allowed to prevent people from securing employment, or slander/libel them. Personal opinions cannot cloud the reference. They can only confirm or deny the accuracy of certain items, such as employment dates, etc. I think the most judgmental question they can answer is, "Would you rehire this person?" Yes or no.
Guide for HIPAA PRivacy Rule
Covers for Stedman's books are designed by the graphic artist who works with them.
Correct about breach of privacy and its NOT too late
As others have stressed on this board, both here and under the politics board, you have a voice and have the opportunity to make it heard. I personally have been e-mailing my US and state elected officials at least once a week. At the Women for Democrats website one of their goals is to bring American jobs back to America. http://democrats.senate.gov/checklistforchange/checklist.cfm The credit card processor for my bank, Heartland, recently had a huge breach in their security system. Per our local State Police this theft is way up due to 2 factors (1) Once our private information leaves the US, those entities are NOT governed by US law and there is little they can do about it; (2) the economy as more people are now willing to buy that information. He said the same goes for our medical information. If you do a search for "medical identify theft", there are over 70,000 hits on that, mind you I did it in quotes, so most likely more without it. This was published Jan 2009, so recent, with many links at the end including a US Government report. http://www.fiercehealthit.com/story/report-hhs-must-lead-medical-identity-theft-fight/2009-01-26?utm_medium=rss&utm_source=rss&cmp-id=OTC-RSS-FHI0 In the years 2000-2004, I was one of the front runners fighting mortgage servicing fraud (very complex, see MSfraud.org) We were told then that there was "nothing to be done" - well a lot of victims of that fraud banded together and did make a BIG difference. We can too by getting our voices heard, working together as a team and following the many suggestions on this very informative forum at MT Stars.
HIPPA=Health Insurance Privacy and Portability Act
Yes, I saw the ad also and felt it was an insult to offer that line rate for what they wanted from an IC. I put the definition of what the initials HIPPA mean for your benefit.
Get Steadman's Guid to the HIPAA Privacy Rule
:)
Stedman's Guide to the HIPAA Privacy Rule has one.
nm
It is not a breech of privacy to send unencrpyted email...
the healthcare provider , i.e. the doc, establishes the standards for protecting privacy of records. You (or your service) is the Business Associate who COMPLIES with whatever standards the doctor sets. Some docs send files by email, some want encryption. Hospitals, obviously, generally do more locking down on their stuff, as they are more open to lawsuits. All YOU have to do to be HIPAA compliant is to COMPLY witih the standards the doc sets. It is not up to you to set them. Also what you and everyone else forgets about HIPAA is it is a two part process. Not only does the patient's medical records have to be disclosed BUT the patient must also suffer a loss because of the disclosure. So even if your doc stands out on the street and tells passers-by about Mrs. So and So and her athlete's foot, unless she incurs a loss from that, it's not a HIPAA violation. Remember this whole thing came about because a pharmacy tech went home and told her high school son that another classmate's father was coming in for HIV drugs...get the picture? Something private was disclosed inappropriately and that's how the girl found out her father was HIV positive.
Work privacy - discussing one employee in hearing of another
I posted a question on the legal board because it is a legal question about workplace privacy and I thought somebody there might know, but please check it if you know anything about laws or agencies that protect worker privacy.
Don't think the worker privacy acts cover discussions such as this...
more likely they cover things like credit reports, evaluations, etc. It's rude to discuss in front of others, but not illegal...of course, in the US you can sue for anything.
It is against California Privacy Laws, and the patient can sue from what I read.
They (companies that outsource) are probably lining the pockets of the politicians!
Hospital fined for breach of octuplet mom's privacy
http://www.cnn.com/2009/US/05/15/octuplet.mom.hospital/index.html
LOS ANGELES, California (CNN) -- The hospital where a California woman gave birth to octuplets in January has been fined $250,000 by the state because nearly two dozen medical workers, including doctors, illegally viewed her medical records, according to state health officials.
![Nadya](http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2009/US/05/15/octuplet.mom.hospital/art.octuplets.gi.jpg")
Nadya Suleman was the subject of controversy after giving birth to octuplets in January.
Kaiser Permanente's Bellflower hospital, where Nadya Suleman's eight babies were born, revealed in March that 15 employees lost their jobs and eight others were disciplined for improperly accessing her computerized medical records.
There was no evidence that information from the medical files was leaked to the news media, which has intensely covered Suleman's story, according to Kathleen Billingsley, deputy director of the California Public Health Department's Center for Health Care Quality.
Six of the privacy breaches happened at other Kaiser Permanente facilities, which are linked into the same computer system housing medical records.
Suleman -- already a single mother with six children -- gave birth to octuplets conceived through in vitro fertilization, fueling controversy. News of her collecting public assistance for some of her children outraged many taxpayers.
maybe it's just a pure and simple invasion of privacy the poster feels they want to protect.
if you do your job, who cares if poster was released from prison. weren't companies hiring prisoners to do MT anyway and weren't they doing credit card customer service?
OpEd on Medical Records Privacy - Front Page of Yahoo
Thought this was interesting, as it pertains to us. On one hand, it could affect our ability to do our jobs at home. On the other, it could really crack down on medical information being sent to India.
--
http://news.yahoo.com/s/csm/yblevins
By Sue A. Blevins Tue Aug 26, 4:00 AM ET
Washington - How would you feel about your personal health information flowing freely over the Internet between public health officials, healthcare providers, insurance and data clearinghouse companies, and others – without your permission?
ADVERTISEMENT
If this doesn't sound like a good idea, it's time to become informed about federal health privacy law.
Today, when Americans visit a healthcare provider for services (including dental and eye exams), they receive a form with a title such as "Notification of Privacy Rights." Many assume that signing the form guarantees that personal information won't be shared with third parties. But the form offers no such guarantees. And neither does federal law.
In fact, the privacy rule established under the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (HIPAA) legally permits healthcare providers to share patients' information with more than 600,000 health- and data-related entities – without a patient's consent. Yet the notification form doesn't clearly explain this.
Individuals control their information when they give consent; they don't with notification. When you sign a notification form, all you are doing is acknowledging its receipt. The HIPAA notification form offers no control over who sees your information and instead just tells you about some of the entities that can access your information, rather than asking for your permission.
Consequently, many physicians and other healthcare providers are urging Congress to strengthen privacy rights. They know firsthand that the HIPAA rule fails to ensure true confidentiality.
"...[T]he regulations under [HIPAA], which were intended to extend patient privacy as we moved from a paper-based system of medical records to a digital system, are a sham. HIPAA allows the routine release of personal health information without patient consent or knowledge, and even over a patient's objection…" stresses Dr. Janis G. Chester, president of the American Association of Practicing Psychiatrists.
As the ACLU put it, "HIPAA has so many medical privacy loopholes, it makes Swiss cheese look solid." The organization also points out that under existing federal regulations, the term "privacy" hasn't been well defined. The ACLU is urging Congress to define medical privacy as "patient control of electronic medical records."
Moreover, these organizations and others are lobbying for privacy amendments to key health Internet-technology (HIT) bills currently being considered in Congress.
Lack of privacy has serious consequences. It fosters making personal health information a commodity that businesses sell and trade in the marketplace, notes ACLU. Weak privacy rights also interfere with doctor-patient relationships. When drafting the HIPAA privacy rule, the US Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) noted that "Privacy violations reduce consumers' trust in the healthcare system and institutions that serve them." The ACLU noted recently that at least one third of Americans are not sharing their complete personal medical histories because they feel their privacy will be weakened in the name of efficiency. Additionally, without strong privacy rights, individuals can't take steps to adequately protect themselves from bad, lost, stolen, or misused data.
Meanwhile, more and more personal data is being collected during routine healthcare visits, including information about marital and sexual matters. A married woman (wedded for over 30 years) and mother of two adult children, said she was appalled when asked during a routine visit if she preferred men or women. She stressed that while she "has nothing to hide," she doesn't think it's anyone's business what her sexual preference is or when her first sexual encounter was (which is often asked during exams).
What's more, it is becoming easier to share healthcare information with just a click of a mouse. As HHS has noted, "Until recently, health information was recorded and maintained on paper and stored in the offices of community-based physicians, nurses, hospitals, and other healthcare professionals and institutions.... Today, however, more and more health care providers, plans, and others are utilizing electronic means of storing and transmitting health information…. In a matter of seconds, a person's most profoundly private information can be shared with hundreds, thousands, even millions of individuals and organizations at a time."
Do Americans really want the intimate details of their lives and families shared so easily without their consent? If not, they need to urge Congress to establish stronger privacy rights. Tinkering with HIPAA won't do it. That would just keep a lot of people busy rewriting regulations that don't guarantee privacy. Rather, Congress needs to pass a new law that defines "privacy" and upholds the precious ethic of consent. The new law should guarantee individuals' freedom to decide whether to be part of electronic medical-record and genetic databases for years to come.
• Sue A. Blevins is president of the Institute for Health Freedom in Washington.
Who designed the cover for Guide to HIPAA Privacy Rule published by Stedman's?
nm
|
!["](http://i.cdn.turner.com/cnn/.element/img/2.0/mosaic/base_skins/baseplate/corner_wire_BL.gif"){kind=small}
