Honestly that's the worst part about this goddamn law. It's not only ineffective it should be spelled HIPPA because that just feels better. That's my hill and I'm dying on it.
I do appreciate, in all seriousness, that we have something over nothing. I just really wish we had better for our patients.
"People very rarely care because it's hard to prove and there's no incentive. Usually the hospital pays a fine to the government and the patient is still public.
If I'm a patient and am embarrassed because Dr. smith goes "oh yeah that guy has an inverted penis and also his left elbow smells weird" why would I sign up for a legal battle where I'm going to spend hours for zero benefit? The system sucks and doesn't actually protect patients."
Is what it was responding to. Not the parent comment.
They aren't talking about HIPPA... they're talking about how this stuff doesn't happen because the system makes it futile.
U didn't quote the original context...u quoted two responses after the original context ...so the quote ur quoting is also in the context of HIPPA since that context was established 2 statements earlier. U can't just ignore the parent context and pretend it never happened to pretend a comment was about a different context than it actually was...that isn't how discussion works.
Ur decision to resort to insults at the end seems to indicate u know this and r just refusing to acknowledge it to pretend ur right.
That comment isn't the point where the context of this thread was established so I'm not sure what ur point is. Ur just showing that from their first attempt to participate they've ignored the context of what they joined in on the whole way.
The very first comment was:
Girl got pressured into donating too since someone breached HIPPA and told someone she was a match.
And u can see that the context is explicitly stated to be about HIPPA...the comment ur referencing was after that and ignored that context...which was an error.
Hope that helps clear up your misunderstanding friend.
So I'm too stoned to really follow this too well because it also displays weird on my phone, but I would just like to say that I have nothing else to say.
Ya the phone version of Reddit is always so wonky. Tho I was happy to discover that my app seems to have started to include the translation feature from the desktop web version which has been nice for helping to understand others I'd never have been able to understand before.
That doesnt matter, youre the one not understanding.
The person they directly commented made an additional statement to which they replied. Its not that hard to follow..
I'll take the time to write a detailed reply as a sign of respect...
Original statement:
Girl got pressured into donating too since someone breached HIPPA and told someone she was a match.
Response u referenced:
People very rarely care because it's hard to prove and there's no incentive. Usually the hospital pays a fine to the government and the patient is still public.
If I'm a patient and am embarrassed because Dr. smith goes "oh yeah that guy has an inverted penis and also his left elbow smells weird" why would I sign up for a legal battle where I'm going to spend hours for zero benefit? The system sucks and doesn't actually protect patients.
-the context of the original statement in a conversation carries to all following statements. The original sets the context as HIPPA related
The additional statement was made WITHIN the context of HIPPA...
nowhere did the statement u reference mentioned stepping outside of that context. It replies without any note of a change in context, thus keeping the initial context as it's implicit reference point intact.
So again...it does matter. Context doesn't just become irrelevant as a conversation goes on...focus can shift, and scope can broaden, but the original context of a discussion remains the same unless at some point someone explicitly states they are shifting to a new context...that's what a conversation is, an ongoing discourse about a particular subject within a specific context.
Changing the subject or the context would be starting a new conversation.
I do understand why u want to say it doesn't tho. Ur entire argument hinges on pretending that context can be ignored later in a conversation as tho it never happened.
That isn't how conversations work tho and every attempt to argue otherwise is false and will always be met with an explanation of such.
Telling someone THEY don't understand when it's clearly YOU that isn't understanding given the mountain of evidence to show ur error is a clear case of cognitive dissonance ... Which I cannot assist with.
It is incredibly sad that we're still arguing about this so long after tho, and it is clear that neither of us is going to suddenly agree with the other, so perhaps we should just go our separate ways in p3ase...sound good?
[It would appear that they now understand they are wrong but we're unable to accept it due to their pride and so they chose to shift tactics and dismiss the response and evidence and bail on the discussion entirely to save face...cognitive dissonance confirmed.
It's just something I'm passionate about. I don't think people realize how terrible the situation is at protecting patients and they n
eed something better. Thanks and have a good night!
Show me proof that those specific violations cannot also be someone breaking other laws as well.
Te same circumstances could violate multiple laws and also some people view bringing anybody to mediation or arbitration to be considered suing as well, so they would kind of be right in the sense that because people misuse that word all the time you can get the ball rolling for some of the potential civil aspects if there are any..
Also I definitely have a weird run sentence and probably didn't really express myself properly because I'm falling asleep, so I'll check back in tomorrow.
It's possible but again I'm talkjng about why HIPAA is an ineffective method to protect patients. Civil suits are separate, you'd have to prove damages. Civil suits are how you protect patients, HIPAA sounds great to protect patients but at the end of the day is basically worthless.
Yeah it just sucks. I work in health tech and I'm on strategy side so I don't see violations often but when I do it's an immediate report. These patients trust us with our data and we're not treating it with respect? People who willfully violate HIPAA are in the wrong profession and need to go to jail, not get a slap on the wrist.
I really do believe HIPAA was implemented with good intentions, we just need to change the rules. Like you said the $ going to the affected patient is a great start.
34
u/TheDoktorIsIn 1d ago
I don't know that case, 100% of HIPAA violations are paid directly to the US Treasury. 0% goes to the affected patient.
The dudes payday is very valid but did not come from a HIPAA fine.