This is kind of weak, mainly because it’s past my bedtime, but I am so sick of the mods overreacting to the extreme and shutting down threads where they think people are scheming to commit crimes. Do they HONESTLY think the board is going to get in trouble because someone is asking for advice on how to see a friend in the hospital who has no family? In the thread “Stupid HIPAA…(also possible law question)”, MerryMagdalen’s friend didn’t show up at work and didn’t call anyone, and they found out he’s in the hospital in critical condition. He has no known family, so he’s in the hospital all alone, and his friends have no way to see him or even find out what is wrong with him. Several people, including picunurse, said that the only way to get through to him is to say they are family.
Well law-enforcement officer Skipmagic stops the outlaws short -
This is one of those cases where one has no choice but to bend the truth to do what is right in the face of a fucked-up, mis-implemented “law” - HIPAA. For all anyone knows, MerryMagdalenIS his sister. What, are they going to ask for a blood sample so they can compare DNA to confirm that she is his sister? Or ask her to produce her birth certificate and his birth certificate to prove that they have the same parents?
The mods have made the SDMB a no-free-speech zone by appointing themselves cyber law enforcers. GASP! How dare those scofflaws talk about ways to “OUTFOX” HIPAA!!! Those evil immoral anarchists!
Not to mention how uncalled-for the closing of this thread was: Genetic Disorders Worse for Men or Women? The mod thinks the guy is asking for homework help and says “we’re not a homework service.” I saw no indication that this wasn’t a genuine question… it seems like any of the questions in GQ.
I don’t like that this board has appointed themselves “cyber law enforcers,” as you say, but they are run by a company that has lawyers and fears of litigation, and I don’t think there’s much we can do about it*. For the record, what happens in cyberspace doesn’t stay in cyberspace; you could consider the powers-that-be to be forward thinking in protecting their asses from any possible litigation, since I believe that is the thing of the future (real life consequences for internet actions).
I also think the second linked OP was a homework question. It didn’t ring true to me, either.
*I’ve run into their litigation fear twice now, with regard to posting the easily-obtained name of a minor who was charged with very serious crimes in Canada. I’m a Canadian citizen, so they said I had to play by the rules of my home country with regard to publishing the name of a minor, in spite of the fact that this is a United States board, and they play that card whenever it’s in their favour to do so. I don’t like that particular double standard.
It is especially unfortunate that the first thread was closed when the OP was explicitly asking for “a *legal *process for getting around HIPAA[.]” I don’t think a thread that discusses how to circumvent a law in a common knowledge way (e.g. one way to avoid those pesky immigration laws is to climb the fence) is really a litigation threat. But even if it were, a better approach would be a mod warning limiting the thread to answering the part of the question that is OK.
I would also like to know why the second question smacks of a HW question.
Can I say that this whole business of restricting patients’ visitors to family members only (unless there’s some medical reason to restrict visits) strikes me as singularly weird? I mean, when I was 17, me and a group of friends visited a friend in a mental hospital without needing anybody’s permission. What’s the rationale behind it?
Thank you Richard for putting it so well. You’re right, they were asking about legal ways to go about it.
I agree, I don’t see why the second thread was so obviously a homework question. Maybe it could be, but maybe it isn’t. There’s really no way of knowing. It wasn’t like they were asking a specific question that would be on a homework assignment, such as “if a train were traveling 70 mph, etc., how long would it take to get to XYZ… blah blah…”
It seems really unfair to just shut it down without a even trying to determine whether it was genuine. Besides, I thought it was an interesting question and I was interested to learn more. Guess I’ll never know now…
Goodness, I didn’t even know my thread had been closed. It dropped off the front page, so I just assumed that it didn’t garner more responses.
I really was asking how to get around HIPAA legally, but I will admit I did edge into “how to break the law so everyone’s happy.” I work in a hospital, I know nurses, and I know that any critical care nurse worth her salt will want someone to visit her patient. And actually, hospital visiting policies don’t have anything to do with HIPAA - according to picunurse that particular hospital has always had an “immediate family only” policy for the ICU, which has nothing to do with law - it’s totally hospital policy. My hospital’s ICU lets friends in also. These people were frustrated because HIPAA limited the information they could get over the phone, and hospital visiting policy doesn’t allow them to see Gene.
I would much rather walk into a federal courtroom and act as attorney (which I’m not) for a group of people than encourage them to break the law.
But…I have some experience in harm reduction, so if people are going to break the law I’d like them to do it as safely as possible.
I can understand why SkipMagic closed it…erring on the side of caution and all that. However, I wish it had been left open so I could hear about any legal recourse these people have.
nyctea scandiaca this is all pretty tangential to your pitting. I’m just surprised to show up here (secondhand) and saying what I have to say. I’ll check back later but now I’m going to bed.
I think the Chicago Reader has a right to set the rules on its own board.
And I have the right to go elsewhere.
Apparently (I can hardly believe it, but…) there are some weird people on the Internet, who would actually post harmful material leading to legal action. :eek:
Anyway, in case that sounds too strong, how about:
if you have advice which should not be published openly under the banner of the Reader, send a private message to the poster.
There is a medical reason to restrict visiting in a critical care unit. Too many people in the room or a constant stream of people makes the very complicated care of that very ill person nearly impossible.
In many units, visiting is restricted to two people for 5 minutes of each hour. In the pediatric ICUs I’ve worked, parents can visit for 22 hours a day, but no one else may visit at all.
I was the one who suggested the second one might be a homework problem. I still think it could be. I’m a biology grad student so the question looks like something I might have gotten in my undergrad degree, though watered down a bit.
-Lil
IANAMod, and I probably wouldn’t have picked out the genetics question as a homework question without percypercy’s suggestion, but with that idea planted, it does look suspicious. Mostly because it’s the person’s very first post - how many people start of with a grammatically coherent, detailed GQ question as their first post here? Not many. It’s not impossible, but most of us start out with a comment on a column or Staff Report, or gingerly dipping a toe in IMHO or MPSIMS, or even a clumsy outburst in the Pit. The level of specificity in the question and the fact that it was the first and only post by the poster does make me suspicious.
I assume the mods then used their super duper madd mod detection skillz to unveil the poster as a sock, as well, as (s)he’s already banninated.
The hospital question was, I think, a bad call. There was no talk of violating a LAW there, merely hospital policy. And hospital policy, despite what the bulldog nurse wants you to think, is not backed by the force of law.
I will mention that people get themselves worked up creating a cover story, but I’ve never actually been asked what my relationship to a patient is for *visiting *purposes. In my case, if I think they’ll give me a problem, I’ll simply wear the “MINISTER” badge I got for $5 off the internet with my very **legal **ordination through Universal Ministries. But even before I had that handy dandy get out of hell free card, no one ever asked me if I was related to the patient to get a Visitor’s Pass.
I did. My very first post was a question about gravitational tidal forces on Europa. What would General Questions become if we start closing threads that ask for factual answers? “Sorry, since you haven’t spent the requisite time on this board, you can’t ask a factual question”.
I don’t know whether or not TANSTAAFBE’s question was a “homework” question or not, but even if it was, that’s not that big a crime, anyway. He should have been granted the benefit of the doubt.
ArizonaTeach… Ahhh. I didn’t make the connection till now. I guess it changes my opinion on the subject. Also, I never read The Moon is a Harsh Mistress, so i didn’t get the reference at first.
Yeah, I gotta agree with this thread. I’'m just a visitor here, testing the waters before deciding whether or not this place is my cup of tea.
I started the following thread which was closed:
Does someone want to explain to me WHY? I was told that I was insulting other members which is against the rules, but for fucks sake, is there anyone with an IQ higher than 80 that cant figure out that this was satire??
