Bystanders with Cell phones and taking pictures

[emt2359]

Here is a link that pertains to video taping police. It does concentrate on the police as they are the ones who have the power to arrest if they don't like what you are doing.

http://ideas.time.com/2012/05/21/a-new-first-amendment-right-videotaping-the-police/

[nypamedic43]

Im on camera all the time...are you kidding? this is Chemung County NY. I cant tell you how many times my friends have texted me to say "wow I just saw you on the news. was it a bad wreck? did the person die?" and I politely tell them I cant talk about it. We just had a HUGE drug bust in this city...on national news. I am so not worried about being filmed. The bystander has been asked nicely to stop...He wouldnt. The cop wouldnt do anything so I would. I would rather pay for a new phone for the asshole then live with the fact that I didnt stop him and this girls pictures end up all over youtube. Yeah...I'm real worried about being filmed...

[DwayneEMTP]

It's a wiki, so I don't have other references now...

(Trying to find stuff in between working. It seems that most laws define freedom of the press and freedom of speech in the same way.)

Article 19 of the ICCPR states that "[e]veryone shall have the right to hold opinions without interference" and "everyone shall have the right to freedom of expression; this right shall include freedom to seek, receive and impart information and ideas of all kinds, regardless of frontiers, either orally, in writing or in print, in the form of art, or through any other media of his choice". Article 19 goes on to say that the exercise of these rights carries "special duties and responsibilities" and may "therefore be subject to certain restrictions" when necessary "[f]or respect of the rights or reputation of others" or "[f]or the protection of national security or of public order (order public), or of public health or morals".^[1][2]

[A Pox On This Place]

In my other life I was a reporter. 5 years, broadcast. And a stringer for the Associated Press. As far as I know, a citizen with a camera or cell phone has NO First Amendment right to:

1. Violate HiPPA.

2. Viloate a person's privacy (in the civil sense).

3. Interfere with prompt and necessary medical care.

4. Interfere with a crime scene.

5. Interfere with an accident reconstruction scene.

Back those ass hats off! I love the people with Indy Media "credentials" hanging around their necks. Anyone can get them. Even the legit press in my day (1979 to 1984) knew that you don't take pictures at accident scenes without clearance, you don't report unconfirmed medical anything or record patients/victims without permission. You could DO any of those but you'd be shunned by Fire, EMS and the coppers and your employer would pay a hefty fee and you'd be let go.

Well, back in the day at least. But I am older than dirt.

Edited June 1, 2012 by A Pox On This Place

[emt2359]

Hipaa does not apply to anyone that does not electronically bill for medical services. Therefore it does not apply to the person with the camera.

[A Pox On This Place]

True, but the other end of that two- pronged steer is: if someone is not in healthcare, no HIPPA violation. Just an ass hat. (But subject to civil penalties.) If someone is in health care there IS an expectation to tell someone to knock it off.

[emt2359]

Here is an interesting read from someone who titles their site with "The Paramedic Lawyer". Although his credentials cannot be verified by me, the read is still good none the less.

If I was to make a training for my staff on what to do, and not to do with respect to cell phone cameras, I would use this site to get things started.

http://staroflifelaw.com/tag/hipaa/

[DwayneEMTP]

Is anyone aware of any specific laws/statutes that specifically protect patients from such people?

I've not had an issue with it, and it's been years now since I've worked anywhere that any of these things might apply, but I'm curious....

[nypamedic43]

I'll just call John Logan. He's an EMS lawyer and for years was the CEO of Greater Valley EMS. He has a practice in Philadelphia. I'll send him an email since its Friday night and as soon as I get an answer, I'll post it here.

[JPINFV]

The same first amendment allows the FF to turn the hose on the asshole. free speech and all that!

The first amendment doesn't allow for battery.

Failing that I would forcefully take his phone and let the powers that be work out the details after the call was complete.

If only there was a word for that. Oh, yea, robbery.

Letting my bitch out of the box= Sir may I see your phone? Wow thats a really nice phone...*insert breaking phone in half here* This is my boss's phone number...My name is blah blah blah...make sure you spell it right. And theres the officer for you to give your complaint too. Here's your phone sir..Have a nice day! Now get on the other side of the street!

So robbery and distruction of property. I hope you have enough money to replace the cell phone.

In my other life I was a reporter. 5 years, broadcast. And a stringer for the Associated Press. As far as I know, a citizen with a camera or cell phone has NO First Amendment right to:

1. Violate HiPPA.

2. Viloate a person's privacy (in the civil sense).

3. Interfere with prompt and necessary medical care.

4. Interfere with a crime scene.

5. Interfere with an accident reconstruction scene.

1. HIPAA doesn't apply to the general public,

2. There is no expectation of privacy when out in public.

3. How is the camera interfering with your prompt and necessary medical care than someone without a camera?

4. How does a camera interfer with a crime scene, assuming it is a crime scene?

5. How does a camera interfer with accident reconstruction?

It's a wiki, so I don't have other references now...

(Trying to find stuff in between working. It seems that most laws define freedom of the press and freedom of speech in the same way.)

Article 19 of the ICCPR states that "[e]veryone shall have the right to hold opinions without interference" and "everyone shall have the right to freedom of expression; this right shall include freedom to seek, receive and impart information and ideas of all kinds, regardless of frontiers, either orally, in writing or in print, in the form of art, or through any other media of his choice". Article 19 goes on to say that the exercise of these rights carries "special duties and responsibilities" and may "therefore be subject to certain restrictions" when necessary "[f]or respect of the rights or reputation of others" or "[f]or the protection of national security or of public order (order public), or of public health or morals".^[1][2]

No more relevant than all of those strongly worded letters that the UN sends to Iran. I have to follow the laws of what ever area I'm in and the UN neither makes nor enforces those laws.

True, but the other end of that two- pronged steer is: if someone is not in healthcare, no HIPPA violation. Just an ass hat. (But subject to civil penalties.) If someone is in health care there IS an expectation to tell someone to knock it off.

What civil penalties? Cite applicable laws or cases where someone faced actual penalties for the mere act of filming out in public. Not other violations that might have also occured, but just for the act of filming.

Similarly, HIPAA doesn't require me to go take somene else's film. Is there an ethical imparitive to attempt to prevent it? Sure, but moving the patient to a more private area or having someone hold up something like a sheet fullfills that imperative. Assult, battery, and robbery, however, is not justified.