All practioners need to comply with the Health Information Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) privacy rule (Fisher, 2013). The privacy rule gives rights to health professionals, as well as to their patients. Under the new law, psychologists can decide whether to release their psychotherapy notes to patients, unless patients would have access to their psychotherapy notes under state law (APA.org, 2010). Though the privacy rule does afford patients the right to access and inspect their health records, psychotherapy notes are treated differently: Patients do not have the right to obtain a copy of these under HIPAA. And when a psychologist denies a patient access to these notes, the denial isn't subject to a review process, as it is with other records.
This allows the client and the attorney to communicate openly and ensures that confidentiality is preserved (Natoli, 2013-2014). The exceptions provided in Rule 1.6 cover the potential loss of life, property, and reputation but no provision is made to expressly prevent an innocent person being imprisoned. Massachusetts has interpreted the ABA MRPC and made such a provision. The Massachusetts Rules of Professional Conduct Rule 3.07 states, “a lawyer may reveal, and to the extent required by Rule 3.3, Rule 4.1(b), or Rule 8.3 must reveal, such information: (1) to prevent the commission of a criminal or fraudulent act that the lawyer reasonably believes is likely to result in death or substantial bodily harm, or in substantial injury to the financial interests or property of another, or to prevent the wrongful execution or incarceration of
This also means that it would not allow information to be given out over the phone. When a physician refuses to give out a patient's information, it lowers the chance of the wrong person getting the information. This rule also gives the patient the rights over all his or her health information. However, this also means that the patient has the right to examine and obtain copies of any health records at any given time. The physician cannot refuse for any reason.
The Army has a phrase for determining precedence in medevacs which has served me well in determining what is an emergency: “life, limb, or eyesight.” Second, immediate intervention is indicated to minimize or alleviate the dangers. Lastly, the patient must be incapable of giving consent with no legal surrogate available. A legal surrogate is someone that has a healthcare power of attorney, is a legal guardian, or a family member. (Baillie et al., 2010, p.48). I chose to write about case number three since I am familiar with crush injuries and the pre-hospital and surgical interventions indicated for them.
Rally Round the Trade Name Law, Ethics and Corporate Governance - LEG 500 Dr. Augustine Weekley Strayer University 11 December 2011 Explain whether or not the fact that Gabby’s surname is Rally gives her the right to use it any way she wishes. The fact that Gabby’s surname is Rally does not give her the right to use it any way she wishes. There are no laws that state that she has any rights to a trade name purely based on the fact that it’s her last name. If the business name Rally is already legally registered as a trade name under common law or as trademark under federal law, then legally she cannot use it as her business name as well. In order for Gabby to gain rights to a business name she must apply for a trade name and/or trademark for her business.
Jinwoo Park (100791161) ASSIGNMENT 2 1. Issue: Can Valley Homes revoke their original offer legally? Rules: A valid offer must contain all the terms to be included in the contract. An offer is the act of presenting something for acceptance. The offer can be revoked at any time before it is actually accepted.
An adult patient, who has mental capacity, can give or withhold consent to a medical treatment for any reason, either rational, irrational or non-existent, or no reason at all. However, there are cases in which competent adult patients have withheld their consent to medical treatment and yet doctors and judges have overruled the patient’s refusal to treatment because of the decision and behaviour of they make which may be called ‘irrational.’ This challenges the primacy of autonomy of the patient and suggests that there may be other ethical principles ‘at work’ behind the veil of patient autonomy. I would argue that behind the deontological façade of autonomy rest two types of conflict: internal and external. Internal conflicts relates to the implicit tensions on how we define autonomy. In exercising an irrational decision, the courts may overrule it as not autonomous.
In this case, the Practice Intervention and Improvement Program was developed in which if the board has reason to believe that the individual’s practice deficiency can be corrected through remediation, and if the individual seeks, complies and completes remediation as prescribed by the board, no further action will be taken on the individual. Responsibility of health care employers, by law, requires them to report the name of any current or former employee who holds a nursing license issued under this chapter who has engaged in conduct that would be grounds for disciplinary action by the board under section 4723.28 of the Revised Code. According to the Momentum Magazine, the top four violations of the Nurse Practice Act at this time are self-administration of non-prescribed medications, theft of medications, failure to practice safe nursing care, and non-compliance with the consent agreement. For any nurses being found to be chemically dependent, the Board of Nursing has developed an alternative program, in
Under federal and some state laws medical facilities need consent from patients or, in the event of incompetency of the patient, informed consent of the legal surrogate. The Supreme Court has not dealt with “quality of life issues” and appears to only condone active or passive “euthanasia” (not legally defined) when there is evidence that consent has been obtained from the competent patient or legal surrogate of an incompetent patient.There are many pros and cons to euthanasia and I feel that the pros outweigh the cons. The most debated are the moral, ethical, and rights issues. Some of these pros and cons argued are the right of a competent, terminally ill person to avoid excruciating pain and embrace a
Whether or not B will have a cause of action for damages for breach of contract depends on whether the Heads of Agreement is itself an enforceable contract. Since A and B have executed the Heads of Agreement, they themselves may have come to an agreement, and execution excuses the need to go through an offer and acceptance analysis to find an agreement. Moreover, the language of the document reflects this conclusion; it records the completion of negotiations for the ‘Heads of Agreement’. Nevertheless, as a matter of law, the parties must have reached a certain and complete agreement R. Under the objective theory of contract; it cannot be concluded that the parties have reached an agreement if it is impossible to ascertain the meaning and legal effect of the terms agreed. Moreover, despite the execution of a document, there will be no enforceable agreement if the contents of that document evidence a positive intention not to contract.