I can assure you that accessing patient medical records unless the patient is under your care, or you have a legitimate business reason, does not just go against a BS paperwork rule. It is absolutely essential for maintaining medical confidentiality, and it is taken very seriously.
You can support what Haim did. You cannot claim that it was not unethical or illegal.
I absolutely can claim "that it was not unethical" as ethics are subjective and arguable.
Law is law.illegal is illegal. I will grant you that.
However, as Madeleine Rowley point out in her article, laws are quite often inconsistently reinforced. I am sure there are plenty of friends of the Left that having been caught violating HIPAA laws, and are not facing the possibility of10 years in prison.
Patient confidentiality is a cornerstone of medical ethics. If it were so subjective that it could be dismissed with whatever justification one might invent, it would be rendered meaningless. And the ethical importance of patient confidentiality is why it has been encoded into law.
Everyone, yourself included, has a right to expect confidentiality. Dr. Haim had no right to determine that the gender clinic patients had less rights than the rest of us.
Rowley’s article gave examples of cases that she had prosecuted, but no examples of HIPPA violations that she had not. If she, or Dr. Haim’s lawyers can present a cogent argument, backed by evidence, for selective prosecution, I would consider it. Until then, claims of selective prosecution are sheer speculation and carry no legal weight whatsoever.
My intention was not to give a lecture but to make an argument in good faith, one that is also based on considerable experience in health care, including HIPAA training, as well as representing a co-worker who had been accused of a violation.
Obviously, the existence of so-called gender affirming care, performed without informed consent, indicates that simply being a medical profession does not assure ethical awareness. At the same time, I respect your experience, and I am open to any argument you might care to make, in good faith, that might persuade me to change my views.
How exactly would this situation have been discovered had it not been for Mr. Haim exposing alleged treatments after they were made illegal? Is the hospital yet under investigation?
Dr. Haim revealed the continuation of the treatments before they had been made illegal. He was revealing that the hospital had lied about their continuation after they falsely claimed that had stopped.
There are various ways the hospital’s false statement might have been revealed without violating the law. Persistent, dogged journalism has revealed countless examples of wrongdoing, without relying on unethical or illegal conduct.
Dr. Haim might have also brought his concerns to sympathetic state legislators, who have broad investigative powers that would not require a breach of patient confidentiality.
Currently, the hospital is under investigation for Medicaid fraud.
We are in agreement on that point. I worked in a major hospital and I was trained on the electronic medical record and HIPAA. That’s part of the reason why I take medical confidentiality so seriously.
We don't have the facts to make that judgement. If these kids were already being treated, and were being tapered, as per Texas law, then there was no violation.
Remember vaccine passports, whe random doofuses got into everyone's medical records?
I can assure you that accessing patient medical records unless the patient is under your care, or you have a legitimate business reason, does not just go against a BS paperwork rule. It is absolutely essential for maintaining medical confidentiality, and it is taken very seriously.
You can support what Haim did. You cannot claim that it was not unethical or illegal.
Let’s just be clear about the facts.
I absolutely can claim "that it was not unethical" as ethics are subjective and arguable.
Law is law.illegal is illegal. I will grant you that.
However, as Madeleine Rowley point out in her article, laws are quite often inconsistently reinforced. I am sure there are plenty of friends of the Left that having been caught violating HIPAA laws, and are not facing the possibility of10 years in prison.
Patient confidentiality is a cornerstone of medical ethics. If it were so subjective that it could be dismissed with whatever justification one might invent, it would be rendered meaningless. And the ethical importance of patient confidentiality is why it has been encoded into law.
Everyone, yourself included, has a right to expect confidentiality. Dr. Haim had no right to determine that the gender clinic patients had less rights than the rest of us.
Rowley’s article gave examples of cases that she had prosecuted, but no examples of HIPPA violations that she had not. If she, or Dr. Haim’s lawyers can present a cogent argument, backed by evidence, for selective prosecution, I would consider it. Until then, claims of selective prosecution are sheer speculation and carry no legal weight whatsoever.
I have been a healthcare provider for 30 years.
Thanks for the lecture.
My intention was not to give a lecture but to make an argument in good faith, one that is also based on considerable experience in health care, including HIPAA training, as well as representing a co-worker who had been accused of a violation.
Obviously, the existence of so-called gender affirming care, performed without informed consent, indicates that simply being a medical profession does not assure ethical awareness. At the same time, I respect your experience, and I am open to any argument you might care to make, in good faith, that might persuade me to change my views.
How exactly would this situation have been discovered had it not been for Mr. Haim exposing alleged treatments after they were made illegal? Is the hospital yet under investigation?
Dr. Haim revealed the continuation of the treatments before they had been made illegal. He was revealing that the hospital had lied about their continuation after they falsely claimed that had stopped.
There are various ways the hospital’s false statement might have been revealed without violating the law. Persistent, dogged journalism has revealed countless examples of wrongdoing, without relying on unethical or illegal conduct.
Dr. Haim might have also brought his concerns to sympathetic state legislators, who have broad investigative powers that would not require a breach of patient confidentiality.
Currently, the hospital is under investigation for Medicaid fraud.
We are in agreement on that point. I worked in a major hospital and I was trained on the electronic medical record and HIPAA. That’s part of the reason why I take medical confidentiality so seriously.
Except this TCH stuff is physical harm vs. BS paperwork rules.
We don't have the facts to make that judgement. If these kids were already being treated, and were being tapered, as per Texas law, then there was no violation.
By "tapering", you probably mean a 0.000001 % annual reduction in dosage per unit body mass.
Do the research. Read the Texas statute.