Whereas, the dividing line between those HIPAA violations and the potentiality of privacy breaches, data or information security and intent are murky, this incidence necessitates action (Vivian, 2009). “ Rationale for Actions Snooping and Breaches This case is not so dissimilar from that of Kaiser Permanente’s Bellflower hospital. Rather, it reflects many of the same actions. (Vivian, 2009) After all, Bellflower Hospital failed to keep its employees from snooping in “the medical records of Nadya Suleman, the mother who set off a media frenzy after giving birth to octuplets in January 2009.” Yet, this security breach at this hospital, resultant of personnel snooping and/or record discovery, was only one of several cases at this hospital (2009). To this end, the HHS revealed it discovered five
IV. Conclusion Because the hospital or the nurse’s actions were not the proximate cause of Mr. Smith’s death, they should file for
Fundamental legal aspects of each case The ANA Code of Ethics are used to help uphold fundamental legalities. When we look at the ethical responsibility and fundamental legalities that are associated with direct patient care and as it applies in the case study case study of patient Marianne, a 79 year-old female, who is brought to the emergency department with hemorrhagic stroke, a bad prognosis of recovering and she does not have an advance directive. The legal aspects of the legal responsibilities of the registered nurse who was a witness in a malpractice case of a nursing colleague that was found to be negligent in following the standards of the nursing practice. The primary obligation of the nurse is to protect the patient’s best interest, maintaining safety, dignity and ethical accountability, which is essential in the first case of Marianne, as she is neurologically unstable and unable to have a voice in her care and does not have a living will. According to the ANA Code of Ethics, the nurse is responsible to provide the family with full disclosure about Marianne’s condition and inform the family of possible outcomes of having
The HIPAA privacy standards make up the HIPAA privacy law. Any violation of the HIPAA privacy rules can leave a healthcare institution open to legal consequences from the wronged individual and possibly the federal government. In this case our elder Mr. Stevens had made it clear to his provider that he did not want his family to be made aware that he was being treated for cancer. This fact was documented in Mr. Stevens’ electronic medical record, but that should not have made any difference in this scenario because his condition would never have been revealed if the clinic staff had followed proper HIPAA
Common laws provide a resolution for courts if the similar case is presented in the future, making sure they have the same outcome. An example of a common law case is Flagiello v. Pennsylvania Hospital, 208 A.2d 193 (Pa1965). In this case, Flagiello was a patient that sued a hospital in Pennsylvania because she hurt herself on hospital property. The hospital said the injury was not related to the original purpose of admission. Her case was dismissed because the common law stated that hospitals, which are charitable institutions, could not be sued for negligence.
Ethical dilemmas arise one being the Lacks family had no idea that a sample of her tumour had been taken and sent to George Gey. In chapter three, Henrietta goes for her diagnosis and treatment and signs an operation permit form. I agree Dr. TeLinde’s research was important but not justifiable because he did not properly let his patient be conscious that her cells would be used. One questions whether or not appropriate consent was given because there was not any proper consent. I believe at least letting Henrietta know what they were doing would be the ethical thing to do.
Temple v. Synthes Corp. (pg 762) Medical implant user (P) v. Implant manufacturer (D) NATURE OF CASE: Appeal of dismissal with prejudice of action for damages for products liability, medical malpractice, and negligence. FACT SUMMARY: Temple's (P) federal suit against Synthes (D), the manufacturer of a plate implanted in Temple's (P) back, was dismissed when Temple (P) failed to join the doctor and the hospital responsible for installing the plate. CONCISE RULE OF LAW: Joint tortfeasors are not necessary parties under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 19. FACTS: A plate and screw device implanted in Temple's (P) back malfunctioned. Temple (P) filed a federal court products liability action against Synthes (D), the manufacturer
Contrary, in Gulf Life Ins. Co. v. Wilson, the beneficiary provided specific evidence of affidavits by doctors and nurses, which stated that the insured was completely incompetent to transact in any sort of business. Gulf Life Ins. Co., 181 S.E.2d 914 at 916. Courts held that mere assertion of one’s illness or of matters unclear at times are insufficient to establish incompetency.
The sixth standard states that a nurse must “maintain each patient/client’s right to privacy by protecting confidential information unless obligated, by law, to disclose the information”. (Georgia Registered Professional Nurse Practice Act, 1981/2011) I believe this standard was not upheld in this case study on several instances. When Ms. H was greeted in a waiting room occupied by other visitors, Dr. K began to discuss Mr. E’s condition with her in spite of the knowledge that she was not listed as the medical power of attorney and there was no proof of her relationship to Mr. E. The nurse made no effort to stop this conversation and take Ms. H to a more private location to wait for her uncle, Mr. Y. In addition to this action, Mr. E’s private health information was breached with Ms. H and her boyfriend under HIPAA guidelines. Reasonable accommodations were not made to prevent others in the waiting room from hearing this private information.
The administrators even go as far as to not keep medical records. If they do not have the medical records then they do not have to treat the patient. What is even more outrageous is the use of Article 99. Article 99 is a legal loophole allowing veteran hospitals to only provide medical service to vets if the injury or illness was caused during actual service. It is a loophole the administrators found because they refuse to take