Permanently Deleted

  • ClimateChangeAnxiety [he/him, they/them]
    ·
    2 years ago

    Like, this literally feels like a situation they’d have as one of the quiz questions on my HIPAA cert class.

    The police ask you to turn over genetic testing data and/or samples from an infant from several years ago to “Assist in an investigation.” They do not have a warrant. What’s the appropriate response? A - Give them the information they’ve asked for. B - Give the samples but not the data. C - Give the data but not the samples. D - Do not share any information and contact your supervisor to take legal action (Correct)

      • Wertheimer [any]
        ·
        edit-2
        2 years ago

        Yeah but what if that baby you had in 1996 got jaundice tomorrow

        What then

        Edit - Oops, the crime was 1996. The baby was 2014ish.

  • ClimateChangeAnxiety [he/him, they/them]
    ·
    edit-2
    2 years ago

    I knew they used Ancestry/23&me data (or something similar) but I do not see how this isn’t illegal. Those aren’t medical companies so it wouldn’t matter, but this is definitely protected health info and giving it to anyone without authorization is illegal.

    I’m pretty sure this breaks HIPAA. I can’t fathom how it wouldn’t. Which might not do anything to the cops, but any doctor involved in giving them that info is supposed to get in serious trouble.

      • ClimateChangeAnxiety [he/him, they/them]
        ·
        2 years ago

        Instead of seeking a warrant for which officers did not have probable cause, the New Jersey State Police subpoenaed the testing program to obtain the blood sample of a child, now nine years old, whose father was suspected of committing the assault, the New Jersey Office of the Public Defender claims.

        So no warrant. Also maybe I don’t understand the US legal system, but federal law supersedes state law doesn’t it? And HIPAA is federal law.

          • ClimateChangeAnxiety [he/him, they/them]
            ·
            2 years ago

            Ngl I’m still not convinced that this was legal at all, even with our very minimal protections.

            Unrelated though, stupid line in that FAQ:

            Some other Federal or State law may require a disclosure, and the Privacy Rule does not interfere with the operation of these other laws

            Motherfuckers why don’t you understand what you are? You are a federal law limiting information sharing. The whole point of that is that it overrules state laws. State laws should mean nothing to you and if a state says “We have a law” you should say “Sir this is a Wendy’s sit down.”

  • Awoo [she/her]
    ·
    2 years ago

    We need laws that give people complete and total control over their own data. I wish there were a system that could show me exactly who has data on me and for what purposes, and that I could take that data from them at any time I want backing out of any agreement made for that data in the first place.

      • CommunistDirtbag [he/him]
        ·
        2 years ago

        they rated how likely you were to be a criminal from birth and put you in prison if you were lucky you got to be a glorified police dog

        • Aryuproudomenowdaddy [comrade/them]
          ·
          2 years ago

          Yeah I remember most of the main character's plot line but weren't there people that would get tipped over the edge from witnessing crimes and then being labeled for extermination themselves?

          • CommunistDirtbag [he/him]
            ·
            2 years ago

            Oh I'm sure there were, I think they presented a moral dilemma like that at some point

  • THC
    ·
    edit-2
    2 years ago

    deleted by creator