Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
|
Home Repair (alt.home.repair) For all homeowners and DIYers with many experienced tradesmen. Solve your toughest home fix-it problems. |
Reply |
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
Posted to alt.home.repair,alt.war.vietnam,uk.rec.sheds
|
|||
|
|||
I JUST TOLD HER "NO, YOU CAN'T HAVE IT."
GOOD MORNING DEAR RECRUITS...................
Pleasance and Your Colonel recently joined an HMO dental group. Their low prices are what steered me. For instance, a number of routine services are actually free each calendar year. You can't beat free. ^@^ Anywho, we were filling out the new patient forms, and I noticed it wanted a social security number. "I don't go there," I said to the little receptionist girl, a cute slender blonde. (Lacking my Pleasance, she woulda been right up my alley.) "Well, Mr. Burke, the problem is that without it I can't enter your information into our computer. It requires a social security entry," she said. "I see. Well then, just enter all zeros or a bogus number," I replied. She did--one or the other--and soon we met our new dentist. Nuff said, with the exception of this: Stand Firm and Be Brave, just like you did in Nam. Opinions? |
#2
Posted to alt.home.repair
|
|||
|
|||
I JUST TOLD HER "NO, YOU CAN'T HAVE IT."
I agree
And you should bring a form with you anytime you have to give out personal information. The form says that you are giving confidential Information and the recipient agrees to keep it confidential and agrees to accept any liability for accidental disclosure. Have them sign and you keep a copy. Every time we sign up for some BS there are Tons of fine print we have to agree to. Time to create some fine print of our own. Mark |
#3
Posted to alt.home.repair
|
|||
|
|||
I JUST TOLD HER "NO, YOU CAN'T HAVE IT."
|
#4
Posted to alt.home.repair
|
|||
|
|||
I JUST TOLD HER "NO, YOU CAN'T HAVE IT."
On 3/14/2015 3:46 PM, Pat wrote:
On Sat, 14 Mar 2015 13:40:39 -0700 (PDT), wrote: I agree And you should bring a form with you anytime you have to give out personal information. The form says that you are giving confidential Information and the recipient agrees to keep it confidential and agrees to accept any liability for accidental disclosure. Have them sign and you keep a copy. Every time we sign up for some BS there are Tons of fine print we have to agree to. Time to create some fine print of our own. Mark Good luck with that. Most people asking you for personal information are employees of a comapny and NOT officers of that company. They have no authority to accept any liability on the part of the company without prior approval. They can commit themselves, but not the company so you haven't gained much by having them sign your fine print form. Interesting point made by Mark as well as by yourself. Add in the legal concept of agency and we can start to have fun. Employees of a corporation are, of course, employees. They are also agents of that corporation and the more authority they have within the corporation the more you can tie them up and leave them twisting in the wind. A person with the status of a manager or even the cashier at the local stop 'n rob is an agent and.... Principals are liable for the torts of their agents. And their actions - arising out of the course of their employment - create liabilities for those same principals which, in the case of a corporation is the corporation. Unless prohibited by law "Hey, applicant, are you married and planning on having a kid?" they are free to ask you anything they want and, similarly, you can tell them whatever you want or nothing. Nancy Reagan had it right: Just say NO! For some reason a big question being asked in the medical arena is, "Do you have firearms in the home?" Correct answer is "That would be none of your business!" |
#5
Posted to alt.fiftyplus,alt.home.repair,alt.online-service.webtv
|
|||
|
|||
I JUST TOLD HER "NO, YOU CAN'T HAVE IT."
"Unquestionably Confused" wrote in message
... On 3/14/2015 3:46 PM, Pat wrote: On Sat, 14 Mar 2015 13:40:39 -0700 (PDT), wrote: I agree And you should bring a form with you anytime you have to give out personal information. The form says that you are giving confidential Information and the recipient agrees to keep it confidential and agrees to accept any liability for accidental disclosure. Have them sign and you keep a copy. Every time we sign up for some BS there are Tons of fine print we have to agree to. Time to create some fine print of our own. Mark Good luck with that. Most people asking you for personal information are employees of a comapny and NOT officers of that company. They have no authority to accept any liability on the part of the company without prior approval. They can commit themselves, but not the company so you haven't gained much by having them sign your fine print form. Interesting point made by Mark as well as by yourself. Add in the legal concept of agency and we can start to have fun. Employees of a corporation are, of course, employees. They are also agents of that corporation and the more authority they have within the corporation the more you can tie them up and leave them twisting in the wind. A person with the status of a manager or even the cashier at the local stop 'n rob is an agent and.... Principals are liable for the torts of their agents. And their actions - arising out of the course of their employment - create liabilities for those same principals which, in the case of a corporation is the corporation. Unless prohibited by law "Hey, applicant, are you married and planning on having a kid?" they are free to ask you anything they want and, similarly, you can tell them whatever you want or nothing. Nancy Reagan had it right: Just say NO! For some reason a big question being asked in the medical arena is, "Do you have firearms in the home?" Correct answer is "That would be none of your business!" I have firearms in Sunset Chateau, and I'll use the business end of it on any coons who try to break in. |
#6
Posted to alt.home.repair
|
|||
|
|||
I JUST TOLD HER "NO, YOU CAN'T HAVE IT."
On 03/15/2015 05:56 AM, Col. Edmund Burke pulled his typing finger out of his nose and wrote:
I have firearms in Sunset Chateau, and I'll use the business end of it on any coons who try to break in. People who brag about being badass gun owners tend to be short-peckered pussies. I know a retired special forces guy that could grab your toy out of your hands, shove it up your ass and have you screaming like a girl scout before you even had a chance to blink. No gun required. |
#7
Posted to alt.home.repair,alt.war.vietnam,uk.rec.sheds
|
|||
|
|||
I JUST TOLD HER "NO, YOU CAN'T HAVE IT."
"Casper Milktoast" wrote in message
... On 03/15/2015 05:56 AM, Col. Edmund Burke pulled his typing finger out of his nose and wrote: I have firearms in Sunset Chateau, and I'll use the business end of it on any coons who try to break in. People who brag about being badass gun owners tend to be short-peckered pussies. You know this because yer a dick sucker, little feller? I know a retired special forces guy that could grab your toy out of your hands, shove it up your ass and have you screaming like a girl scout before you even had a chance to blink. No gun required. Most of yer so-called badasses, like this imaginary friend of yers, are more like sidewalk sissy boys who would've run away from me like frightened schoolgirls back in Nam. Big talkers like you need a sissy slap to set 'em straight. LOL |
#8
Posted to alt.home.repair
|
|||
|
|||
I JUST TOLD HER "NO, YOU CAN'T HAVE IT."
|
#9
Posted to alt.home.repair
|
|||
|
|||
I JUST TOLD HER "NO, YOU CAN'T HAVE IT."
|
#10
Posted to alt.home.repair
|
|||
|
|||
I JUST TOLD HER "NO, YOU CAN'T HAVE IT."
HIPPOS! WHO THE **** SAID ANYTHING ABOUT HIPPOS?
|
#11
Posted to alt.home.repair
|
|||
|
|||
I JUST TOLD HER "NO, YOU CAN'T HAVE IT."
Or if they are hacked.
Mark |
#12
Posted to alt.home.repair
|
|||
|
|||
I JUST TOLD HER "NO, YOU CAN'T HAVE IT."
|
#13
Posted to alt.home.repair
|
|||
|
|||
I JUST TOLD HER "NO, YOU CAN'T HAVE IT."
On 3/14/2015 6:26 PM, Unquestionably Confused wrote:
For some reason a big question being asked in the medical arena is, "Do you have firearms in the home?" Correct answer is "That would be none of your business!" They ask that for the same reason they ask if you smoke or drink: because all three are health hazards. More pre-school kids are killed by firearms than are cops, and obviously, the majority of those kids are being killed by guns in their homes. So if the doc asks if you have guns, and knows you have kids, s/he is going to remind you that kids *will* get into everything. |
#15
Posted to alt.home.repair
|
|||
|
|||
I JUST TOLD HER "NO, YOU CAN'T HAVE IT."
On 3/16/2015 7:38 AM, Moe DeLoughan wrote:
On 3/14/2015 6:26 PM, Unquestionably Confused wrote: For some reason a big question being asked in the medical arena is, "Do you have firearms in the home?" Correct answer is "That would be none of your business!" They ask that for the same reason they ask if you smoke or drink: because all three are health hazards. More pre-school kids are killed by firearms than are cops, and obviously, the majority of those kids are being killed by guns in their homes. So if the doc asks if you have guns, and knows you have kids, s/he is going to remind you that kids *will* get into everything. If the question was coming only from pediatricians, I might buy that. But it's not. Now that information is in your medical records and your medical records under Affordable Care Act are... Let's justify the medicos asking for your household income and investment status as well. After all, if you have plenty of money, isn't it rather more unlikely that he'll need to concern himself with eventually treating you for scurvy or malnutrition?g |
#16
Posted to alt.home.repair
|
|||
|
|||
I JUST TOLD HER "NO, YOU CAN'T HAVE IT."
On 3/16/2015 7:51 AM, Moe DeLoughan wrote:
On 3/15/2015 1:00 PM, wrote: On Sun, 15 Mar 2015 12:14:58 -0400, Peter wrote: On 3/14/2015 4:40 PM, wrote: That's against the law, there's a $250,000 penalty per incident, and employees can be personally sued for violations as well as the doctor or dentist they're working for. Real medical professionals are professionally paranoid and well trained about minimizing their liability. It's the quacks you have to worry about. I had a woman bring me a computer to set up for her kids. Turned out she was a receptionist for a chiropractic office, and the quack-o-practor had given her one of their office pcs for her kids to use. They should have pulled and destroyed the hard drive before getting rid of the pc. They did not. I started the pc, noticed a documents folder labeled "Patients", clicked it open and found it full of medical files. I shut that sucker down asap. I phoned the lady and informed her that she and her boss had a major HIPAA violation going to the tune of $250K PER PATIENT FILE and they were going to dispose of the hard drive properly or I was gonna have to blow the whistle. Not to put too fine a point on it but... while there are penalties and rather serious ones at that, the sky is NOT falling as you would claim, Moe. Do a little research before throwing out YOUR figures or at least wait until the government adopts YOUR figures.g Civil Penalties: 1. Covered entity or individual did not know (and by exercising reasonable diligence would not have known) the act was a HIPAA violation. $100-$50,000 for each violation, up to a maximum of $1.5 million for identical provisions during a calendar year 2. The HIPAA violation had a reasonable cause and was not due to willful neglect. $1,000-$50,000 for each violation, up to a maximum of $1.5 million for identical provisions during a calendar year 3. The HIPAA violation was due to willful neglect but the violation was corrected within the required time period. $10,000-$50,000 for each violation, up to a maximum of $1.5 million for identical provisions during a calendar year 4. The HIPAA violation was due to willful neglect and was not corrected. $50,000 or more for each violation, up to a maximum of $1.5 million for identical provisions during a calendar year |
#17
Posted to alt.home.repair
|
|||
|
|||
I JUST TOLD HER "NO, YOU CAN'T HAVE IT."
In article ,
Unquestionably Confused wrote: Civil Penalties: 1. Covered entity or individual did not know (and by exercising reasonable diligence would not have known) the act was a HIPAA violation. You serious? The individual (the secretary) may not have known, and if so that might in and of itself might be a violation. There are stringent regulations holding the entity responsible for developing policies and procedures for handling the information and developing training programs on those policies and procedures. The entity (the practice) would have known unless they have been in a coma for the last 10 years or so. Violations (and heavy fines) have been levied for similar situations that would have been made worse by the fact the file with patient identifiers wasn't encrypted (that alone would get you nailed if the computer fell into the "wrong" hands. 2. The HIPAA violation had a reasonable cause and was not due to willful neglect. Lack of encryption has been established as being at least prima facie evidence of willful neglect as has lack of policies/procedures governing disposal of computers containing personalized data, -- ³Statistics are like bikinis. What they reveal is suggestive, but what they conceal is vital.² ‹ Aaron Levenstein |
#18
Posted to alt.home.repair
|
|||
|
|||
I JUST TOLD HER "NO, YOU CAN'T HAVE IT."
On 3/16/2015 8:18 AM, Kurt Ullman wrote:
In article , Unquestionably Confused wrote: Civil Penalties: 1. Covered entity or individual did not know (and by exercising reasonable diligence would not have known) the act was a HIPAA violation. You serious? The individual (the secretary) may not have known, and if so that might in and of itself might be a violation. There are stringent regulations holding the entity responsible for developing policies and procedures for handling the information and developing training programs on those policies and procedures. The entity (the practice) would have known unless they have been in a coma for the last 10 years or so. Violations (and heavy fines) have been levied for similar situations that would have been made worse by the fact the file with patient identifiers wasn't encrypted (that alone would get you nailed if the computer fell into the "wrong" hands. 2. The HIPAA violation had a reasonable cause and was not due to willful neglect. Lack of encryption has been established as being at least prima facie evidence of willful neglect as has lack of policies/procedures governing disposal of computers containing personalized data, It would seem that you are a master at taking things out of context and shooting the messenger. Those are the governments penalties, not mine... as well as their classification system. My point was simply that there is no automatic $250,000 fine per violation as stated in a prior post by Moe. It will be interesting to see what fines, if any, are levied when the US Government or one of their vaunted employees screw the pooch and improperly disseminate HIPAA protected information. |
#19
Posted to alt.home.repair
|
|||
|
|||
I JUST TOLD HER "NO, YOU CAN'T HAVE IT."
On 3/16/2015 8:38 AM, Moe DeLoughan wrote:
They ask that for the same reason they ask if you smoke or drink: because all three are health hazards. More pre-school kids are killed by firearms than are cops, and obviously, the majority of those kids are being killed by guns in their homes. So if the doc asks if you have guns, and knows you have kids, s/he is going to remind you that kids *will* get into everything. Not sure what demographic you mean. I'm over 50, and can't say as I remember ever knowing personally of any kid who was ever shot by a home owned gun. My uncle Edward, in ohio, (who was very depressed and mentally unstable) did commit suicide by gun. But, that's hardly the demographic of healthy and happy kids in a home with a responsible gun owner. - .. Christopher A. Young learn more about Jesus .. www.lds.org .. .. |
#20
Posted to alt.home.repair
|
|||
|
|||
I JUST TOLD HER "NO, YOU CAN'T HAVE IT."
On 3/16/2015 8:54 AM, Unquestionably Confused wrote:
For some reason a big question being asked in the medical arena is, "Do you have firearms in the home?" Correct answer is "That would be none of your business!" If the question was coming only from pediatricians, I might buy that. But it's not. Now that information is in your medical records and your medical records under Affordable Care Act are... Let's justify the medicos asking for your household income and investment status as well. After all, if you have plenty of money, isn't it rather more unlikely that he'll need to concern himself with eventually treating you for scurvy or malnutrition?g The big issue is who is asking, and why. I can imagine people thinking that big brother is asking, for future registration and confiscation of personal owned weapons of any sort. - .. Christopher A. Young learn more about Jesus .. www.lds.org .. .. |
#21
Posted to alt.home.repair
|
|||
|
|||
I JUST TOLD HER "NO, YOU CAN'T HAVE IT."
In article ,
Unquestionably Confused wrote: It would seem that you are a master at taking things out of context and shooting the messenger. Those are the governments penalties, not mine... as well as their classification system. Sorry, there wasn't any indicator (at first glance anyway) that these were from the government and that you weren't arguing that there was no violation here because of these. Mea culpa, although I do claim extenuating circumstances here such as it is hard to keep things in context when context is lacking. It will be interesting to see what fines, if any, are levied when the US Government or one of their vaunted employees screw the pooch and improperly disseminate HIPAA protected information. Health and Human Services says that while it can investigate privacy infractions for the VA, it has no enforcement authority. I could find nothing about investigation of infractions at HHS-in house organizations such as the NIH hospitals or Medicare. The applicability of HIPAA to the hospitals of the military is also a bit unclear from what I can find. I am sure this surprises you down to your toes. (grin). -- ³Statistics are like bikinis. What they reveal is suggestive, but what they conceal is vital.² ‹ Aaron Levenstein |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|