On 08/29/11 6:31 PM, DGDevin wrote:


"DerbyDad03" wrote in message ...

Mary's option of reporting it to her supervisor still exists,
regardless of how many people - other than her supervisor - she told.

Not if the supervisor hears about it from someone else first. By telling
Karen, Mary has made that possible. Karen (everybody knows she's the
biggest blabbermouth at work) has already told three other people, it's
only a matter of time.

It's really as simple as this:

Mary - *Mary* - will have the option of telling her supervisor or not
telling her supervisor until the day she dies. She will always and
forever have the option of never uttering the words "Bob asked me to
copy a file" to her supervisor.

It doesn't matter if her supervisor hears it from 10,000 people or even
has the original request stored on digital media. The option to never
move her lips to form the words "Bob asked me to copy a file" in front
of her supervisor remains with Mary.

It will always be Mary's choice to speak or not to speak.

It really is that simple.


Even if the supervisor finds out about through other means, Mary's
option of reporting to her supervisor was never lost.

If the supervisor finds out about it elsewhere he's going to look at
Mary with suspicion from now on, he'll wonder if she was just thinking
it over and might have given the file to Bob, he'll wonder why she
didn't Bob's request.

The supervisor can look at Mary any way (s)he wants, (S)he can make
Mary's work live as miserable as (s)he possibly can. (S)he can fire Mary
for a variety of reasons or maybe even for no reason at all.

When it's all said and done, it's still Mary's option - her *choice* -
as to whether or not she walks into the boss's office and says "Bob
asked me to copy a file."



How do you know that the final, documented, straw that broke the
camel's back wasn't related to the Care Plan in that file?

So are there are parts of the story we haven't heard?

I always find it interesting when someone cuts out the line that is
being countered. Why did you cut out the line where you said "There is
no good reason for him to want that file"?

I always find it interesting when someone sees ulterior motives behind
every bush. I assumed we're all grownups here with functional memories
and don't need the entire post to be quoted line for line to recall the
how the conversation was going.

I always find it interesting when someone quotes most of the
conversation yet chooses the leave out the specific line be discussed.
Just seems a bit odd, at least to me.


All I was doing was countering your statement that "There is no good
reason for him to want that file". There could be a multitude of good
reasons for him to want that file. You have no way knowing that there
is "no good reason."

I was looking at it from Mary's perspective (since she's the one whose
actions you want our advice on). From where she stands there is no good
reason to give Bob that file because if he then does something with it
(like sue the employer) her role will come out and at the very least
she'll lose her job. She could also be prosecuted for handing over a
patient file to a former employee, and her chances of finding another
job in the health care field will be dim if she's fired for violating
HIPAA. See, from Mary's point of view there is no good reason (for her)
for Bob to want that file. It doesn't matter if he wants it because it
will help him discover a cure for cancer, for Mary it's a live hand
grenade with a loose pin.

You said "There is no good reason for him to want that file."

I say bull.

Okay Bob. Or Mary or Karen, whichever one you are.

Now see, there you go. Losing the argument and getting all snippy.

Wasn't it you that said "I assumed we're all grownups here"?