violation or not

[ellis8934]

i was looking through the picture gallery and came up on this pic. Is this a violation of hippa or not?

[Dustdevil]

No way to tell. Depends on who took it. Why they took it. Who released it. Why they released it. Who the patient was. Whether this was an actual patient or a re-enactment. If the patient is identifiable. Lots of factors.

That said, I'd probably fire any of my people if they took that photo, whether they released it or not.

And there is no such thing as HIPPA, unless you're talking about the Spanish word for a female hippo.

[tskstorm]

Better question would be, does someone who has expired have HIPAA rights?

http://www.hcpro.com/HIM-23324-866/Does-HIPAA-cover-deceased-individuals.html

It would seem so!

[medic0surgeon]

i was looking through the picture gallery and came up on this pic. Is this a violation of hippa or not?

1. This person is dead and therefore not a patient; not sure if it would have anything to do with hippa.

2. Once the picture is on the internet, if there is no accompanying copyright tags, rights to the picture are lost.

[Chief1C]

Chances are, they took it from elsewhere on the internet anyway.

[letmesleep]

1. This person is dead and therefore not a patient; not sure if it would have anything to do with hippa.

2. Once the picture is on the internet, if there is no accompanying copyright tags, rights to the picture are lost.

Just wondering how this wouldn't be a pt. Not knowing the details of the call, lets call it a GSW to the head. Do you not still assess this person to determine their status? Would that not make them your pt?

[ellis8934]

good catch, HIPAA, I stand corrected thank you

Edited December 19, 2009 by ellis8934

[HERBIE1]

1. This person is dead and therefore not a patient; not sure if it would have anything to do with hippa.

2. Once the picture is on the internet, if there is no accompanying copyright tags, rights to the picture are lost.

Assuming this is real(it seems to be)-

I have news for you- dead or not, this person(or more accurately, his family or anyone else who chooses to represent his interests) does indeed have a beef, if they so choose.

Currently there is an issue with someone posting info on Facebook about a patient who was very well known around here for years. Homeless, alcoholic, and was around for 20+ years. Everyone in the business knew him. Someone decided it would be fun to reminisce about the situations this guy was in. Without getting into too many details, let's just say a interested 3rd party found out about these postings, and is pursuing legal action against all those who were involved in the discussion- especially the person who made the initial post.

Individuals involved in the discussion are also being subjected to discipline from their employers for potential violations of privacy and protected health information laws.

I'm no computer whiz, but potentially, there are ways of tracking these things. It's not worth risking it.

Most of us have been guilty of taking pictures at accidents or particularly grotesque scenes- sometimes for training purposes, often times simply for their "wow" factor. Years ago, before the days of cell phones, digital cameras, and the internet, so many of us had something called a "ghetto cam"-a cheap, disposable camera for such things. This was long before we were so in tune with privacy issues, and although improper and intrusive, few outside this profession ever saw these pictures. Now, with a click of a button, millions can instantly have access to a picture such as the one in the archives.

We need to be more careful.

[Chief1C]

1. This person is dead and therefore not a patient; not sure if it would have anything to do with hippa.

Are you suggesting that the dead have no rights?

Edited December 19, 2009 by 4c6

[island emt]

Can't be sure , But it looks like fake blood to me from a moulage kit.