Comments on: 13 hospital workers get canned for snooping through Britney’s records

By: someone

someone — Mon, 17 Mar 2008 08:01:36 +0000

Many years back the hospital I worked at had similar problems (before the stronger HIPPA codes):

1. Something happened to somebody that the media was doing backflips to write about. We all had to attend ‘the meeting’ where we were told about how they’d know everyone that accessed the patient’s digital records, and anyone that accessed them that wasn’t a direct caregiver during that shift risked losing their jobs.

Although different levels of licenses had varying amounts of access, housekeeping and kitchen staff could still access many areas in the program. Those positions didn’t have as much to lose as licensed employees that spent many years in school and building up their careers if they accessed the files and were caught.

2. Occasionally there’d be a patient whose circumstances required anonymity because of threats to them. They had a system for this, but they found it was a very weak system when someone with a half a brain was very determined to find someone.

They had a pretty decent system in place to prevent kidnappings of babies and kids, and ran occasional drills, then had post-drill meetings to analyze weaknesses. They’d also review kidnapping cases after hearing about it in other places in a US hospital. So you’d think that hospitals would use the ‘learn from other hospitals mistakes’ lessons to come up with better anonymity systems. Similar stories have been in the media with other celebrities.

Report this comment as spam or abuse

By: Cindy Kennedy

Cindy Kennedy — Sat, 15 Mar 2008 23:56:48 +0000

It doesn’t matter who Britney Spears is, how famous she is, or what she has done - she is entitled to the same medical privacy that the rest of us are.

Report this comment as spam or abuse

By: valentina

valentina — Sat, 15 Mar 2008 23:37:04 +0000

They may not have an easy time getting another job in this field if a reference from the previous employer is required. Why would want to hire untrustworthy people like that anyway? They brought it on themselves. They could have sold that info. to the tabloids among other things and profited. They knew better too. I have absolutely NO sympathy for them.

Report this comment as spam or abuse

By: sam

sam — Sat, 15 Mar 2008 19:34:45 +0000

I also think the higher ups should be handled the same as well. A higher education obviously didn’t keep them from lowering themselves. Let them explain that to a new employer. Just because a floor sweeper is easier to replace doesn’t mean a doctor gets carte blanche to do as he pleases. Accountability peeps. Just ask Spitzer.

Report this comment as spam or abuse

By: sam

sam — Sat, 15 Mar 2008 19:32:14 +0000

No sympathy. Just because the system isn’t fool proof, as evidenced by the fools who accessed it, doesn’t excuse their breaching of confidential information just for their own amusement or curiousity. I’d hate to think someone would do the same to me. And if they are untrustworthy enough to breach it by reading, knowing better, who’s to say they wouldn’t leak as well?

No pity; they should have kept to their obligations on their job.

Report this comment as spam or abuse

By: mollination

mollination — Sat, 15 Mar 2008 19:05:13 +0000

I agree that UCLA needs to update their system (especially if they “treat celebs all the time”), but I also say fire those idiots.

I would be furious if I found out I couldn’t trust my DOCTOR and the clinic where she worked. That’s one of the most vulnerable positions we can be in and we have complete blind-faith that those people wont screw us over.

Report this comment as spam or abuse

By: Loob

Loob — Sat, 15 Mar 2008 18:20:37 +0000

Firing them was absolutely the correct thing.
Since it is a serious breach of privacy, I think they should also be prosecuted. That might possibly teach them a lesson, since obviously they are horrible people without a shred of manners or compassion, and don’t understand the whole “treat others with kindness” thing that we were all supposed to learn as children.

Report this comment as spam or abuse

By: headache

headache — Sat, 15 Mar 2008 17:00:03 +0000

I think they should have been reprimanded not fired but then again, they knew damn well not to be in the medical files of people whose cases they were not directly involved in.

When I worked for a wireless company, we were told many times during the training process to not even look at the accounts of people we knew else we would be fired and I never did as tempting as it was.

The fact is these people let their curiosity overrule common sense and the privacy of their patients despite knowing it could mean their jobs. The practically fired themselves.

Report this comment as spam or abuse

By: Cindy Kennedy

Cindy Kennedy — Sat, 15 Mar 2008 16:10:44 +0000

Have you ever heard of HIPAA? Medical information is PRIVATE.

A hospital employee who is snooping without any real reason, should be fired permanently. I do not feel sorry for these hospital workers, they were just being nosy and deserve to be fired.

Report this comment as spam or abuse

By: Toubrouk

Toubrouk — Sat, 15 Mar 2008 15:15:05 +0000

Firing employees for just looking at records widely accessible? Is there a better way to fester a relationship between the staff and the bosses?

Report this comment as spam or abuse