Newest HIPAA boondoggle

[bigbearfng 9]

Just wondering who else has already been caught in the middle of conflicts between public safety and hipaa. Seems like all the previous clarifications from court decisions from the old hipaa have been thrown out and now they're starting over deciding on how to interpret this boondoggle rewrite-so the conflicts between mandatory reporting of crimes/victims vs hipaa is back all over again. Sucks!
OK end of rant.......

[pirana 0]

Got an interesting form to sign in the back-to-school packet this year. Apparently, if the kids are on a field trip and require medical care, the chaparones must be carrying a form in order to receive any information whatsoever from the provider of care.

The scenario given as an example is that there is a bus crash and the kids end up in several different hospitals. The hospital is not even allowed to tell the school officials which kids went to which facilities until the form is provided.

I'm expecting that next year I'll get a form to swear to the fact that I am really the one signing the forms - and it will require a notary.

" . . . the lust for power can be just as completely satisfied by suggesting people into loving their servitude as by flogging them and kicking them into obedience." -- Aldous Huxley

[Lucky... 0]

Quote

Just wondering who else has already been caught in the middle of conflicts between public safety and hipaa. Seems like all the previous clarifications from court decisions from the old hipaa have been thrown out and now they're starting over deciding on how to interpret this boondoggle rewrite-so the conflicts between mandatory reporting of crimes/victims vs hipaa is back all over again. Sucks!
OK end of rant.......

I know asking a neo-con for evidence is asking too much, but perhaps you could provide a citation.

HIPPA provides people getting employed and signed up with group plans can submit preexisting conditions after 6 months, it was the predecessor to Obama's HC provision that health insurers must accept prexisting conds regardless. I don't know HIPPA like the back of my hand, but am learning it has some very good provisions. If you have a beef to make, provide cites as to what you're talking about.

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

Quote

Just wondering who else has already been caught in the middle of conflicts between public safety and hipaa. Seems like all the previous clarifications from court decisions from the old hipaa have been thrown out and now they're starting over deciding on how to interpret this boondoggle rewrite-so the conflicts between mandatory reporting of crimes/victims vs hipaa is back all over again. Sucks!
OK end of rant.......

I know asking a neo-con for evidence is asking too much, but perhaps you could provide a citation.

I know asking you to NOT jump to conclusions is asking too much, but perhaps you could make a post WITHOUT some sort of politial smear.

Quote

HIPPA provides people getting employed and signed up with group plans can submit preexisting conditions after 6 months, it was the predecessor to Obama's HC provision that health insurers must accept prexisting conds regardless. I don't know HIPPA like the back of my hand, but am learning it has some very good provisions. If you have a beef to make, provide cites as to what you're talking about.

HIPPA does a lot more than that. I know asking you do to some research before shooting off your mouth is asking too much, but perhaps you could click this link: click.

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[Lucky... 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Just wondering who else has already been caught in the middle of conflicts between public safety and hipaa. Seems like all the previous clarifications from court decisions from the old hipaa have been thrown out and now they're starting over deciding on how to interpret this boondoggle rewrite-so the conflicts between mandatory reporting of crimes/victims vs hipaa is back all over again. Sucks!
OK end of rant.......

I know asking a neo-con for evidence is asking too much, but perhaps you could provide a citation.

Quote

I know asking you to NOT jump to conclusions is asking too much, but perhaps you could make a post WITHOUT some sort of politial smear.

Great to see neo-cons back each other, I just want a citation to better explain what he is talking about. You've affirmed it is asking too much.

Quote

HIPPA provides people getting employed and signed up with group plans can submit preexisting conditions after 6 months, it was the predecessor to Obama's HC provision that health insurers must accept prexisting conds regardless. I don't know HIPPA like the back of my hand, but am learning it has some very good provisions. If you have a beef to make, provide cites as to what you're talking about.

Quote

HIPPA does a lot more than that. I know asking you do to some research before shooting off your mouth is asking too much, but perhaps you could click this link: click.

No shit, this is why I stated this:

I don't know HIPPA like the back of my hand, but am learning it has some very good provisions

I know it does a lot of things, most importantly to non-sociopaths is that it paved teh way for insurers to accept preexisters by mandation.

As for shooting my mouth off, I didn't start the thread acting as if I knew HIPPA like the back of my hand and stated such. It is typical to post a link, your boy didn't, so just keep defending him and ignoring that. Also, his point was so undiscernable I have no idea of what he was trying to say other than he hates anything that is a product of Dems.

• Quote

[mnealtx 0]

No shit, this is why I stated this:

I don't know HIPPA like the back of my hand, but am learning it has some very good provisions

[bigbearfng 9]

I know asking a neo-con for evidence is asking too much, but perhaps you could provide a citation.

___________________________________________
Dude! this has nothing to do with "neo-con" or anything else political!
Everybody else here understands it's the privacy provisions that are putting folk in the middle of the lawyers legalese catch 22 BS again.
And yes as above, when you call the hospital and ask how your family is doing, the staff is apt to not tell you anything for fear of their jobs.
Probably going to make it even harder to ID john/jane does too.

[Andy9o8 0]

Quote

I know asking a neo-con for evidence is asking too much, but perhaps you could provide a citation.

___________________________________________
Dude! this has nothing to do with "neo-con" or anything else political!
Everybody else here understands it's the privacy provisions that are putting folk in the middle of the lawyers legalese catch 22 BS again.
And yes as above, when you call the hospital and ask how your family is doing, the staff is apt to not tell you anything for fear of their jobs.
Probably going to make it even harder to ID john/jane does too.

HIPAA was initially a bill introduced in the Senate jointly by a Dem and a Repub. It passed Congress in 1996, when both houses were Republican majority; then it was signed into law by the Dem president.

Complaining here is fine, but if that's all you're doing, it's not enough. You have a Congress-member and a Senator. Use your First Amendment rights to vigorously petition them and their colleagues in Congress to change the law. Mere talk isn't valueless, but as saying goes, it is cheap. Act.