If someone tells you that you cannot see your family’s medical records because of HIPAA, show them this article. The federal Department of Health and Human Services, Office for Civil Rights, published a “guidance” dated December 3, 2002 and revised April 3, 2003 that explains the circumstances in which health care providers are in fact authorized to disclose medical records to family members. The Office for Civil Rights also published a “Guide to the HIPAA Privacy Rule” that explains the rule in plain language.

Here is what the law allows:  A health care provider can discuss a patient’s health information with you if you are present with the patient and the patient agrees or when given the opportunity, does not object. For example an emergency room doctor can talk to the patient in front of a family member.  A doctor can disclose information about a patient’s difficulty in walking to the patient’s sister who may be driving the patient home.

Even if the patient is not present or is incapacitated a health care provider can share information with a family member involved in the patient’s care if it is in the best interest of the patient. For example a surgeon may talk about the patient’s condition to a spouse while the patient is unconscious. And a health care provider can provide information about a patient’s medication to a family member who calls with questions about a particular prescription.

A health care provider can discuss a patient’s care over the telephone without obtaining proof of a person’s identity. Family members can pick up a filled prescription, medical supplies, x-rays, and other similar items for the patient. Information may also be disclosed in writing.

For additional information about disclosure of medical records by specific types of health care providers see the FAQ nursing home and medical malpractice section of our website at ZQLAWYERS.COM.

The authors contend the evidence demonstrates that nursing home residents in the United States would have 7,000 fewer pressure ulcers if they were cared for by not-for-profit homes. This is a significant number because bedsores can become life threatening when infected and are always painful.

Unfortunately, the decision about whether your family members will be safe in a particular nursing home is simply too difficult. The study results do suggest that one of the factors you should take into consideration in making your decision is whether the nursing home is for profit or not-for-profit. Unfortunately the study’s results were based on statistics relating to a wide population of nursing homes and its conclusions are less helpful when considering a particular nursing home.

For example two not-for-profit nursing homes in the Daytona Beach area are rated for quality quite differently by state government inspectors.  Good Samaritan Society-Daytona is affiliated with the not-for-profit Lutheran Good Samaritan Society. Bishops Glen Retirement Center is affiliated with the not-for-profit United Church of Christ.

As of the date of this article while Bishop’s Glen is rated three stars out of 5 for overall inspection by the State of Florida it has the highest five-star rating for items important in the study results, pressure ulcers and restraints and abuse. Good Samaritan Society, on the other hand, has the lowest ranking, only one star, for overall inspection, the lowest ranking for pressure ulcers and the lowest ranking for restraints and abuse. Thus, one of the not for profits is in the bottom 20% for quality of care while the other is highly ranked.

For much more information about how to choose a nursing home visit our website at zqlawyers.com.

Amazing as it may seem, a pending legislative bill pre-filed in the 2009 Florida Legislature would allow nursing homes to commit crimes against their patients, neglect their patients and not be held accountable. Undoubtedly, nursing home lobbyists and special interests have proposed this bill. It provides that if nursing homes comply with minimum staffing requirements they cannot be held liable in criminal, regulatory or civil actions. This means that if they commit crimes against their patients they would be immune from prosecution.  It also means that if they neglect their patients they would not be subject to discipline by the state agency that licenses them. They would also not be accountable to their patients for the suffering they cause by their negligence.  For example, if a nursing home’s negligence causes a patient to acquire a huge bedsore that later becomes infected and causes pain, suffering and even death, the nursing home would not be responsible.
This is one of the most dangerous bills proposed in the Florida Legislature in the last decade. If the Legislature passes the bill it would be abdicating his responsibility to protect the elderly in the state of Florida.
Nursing homes in Florida are required by law to have minimum staff available to provide care for their patients. The operative word is “minimum.” Nursing homes that have patients requiring a higher level of care because of the acuity of their illness should not be allowed to avoid responsibility for neglecting their patients by claiming that they meet minimum staff standards when they know their patients need more staff attention than the minimum required.
Further, just because a nursing home may have enough staff on hand to comply with the requirement does not mean that those staff will do a good job.  To protect the elderly in Florida, nursing home administrators and supervisors must be given the incentive to be sure that their staff are properly trained and supervised so that they provide good care and they do not abuse their patients.
Nursing home care has improved in Florida over the last 20 years in part because nursing homes have been subject to lawsuits to be held accountable for the suffering they cause. This bill would be a drastic step backwards and would allow nursing homes to avoid accountability for their crimes, and neglect of patients and negligence.  Central Florida and Volusia County voters should contact their state legislators and warn them of the dangers of this bill.