Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

My Doctor's Office Asked Me To Lie

stallman.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 245 posts

Re: My Doctor's Office Asked Me To Lie

#101

Post by Jun8 »

jrs235 wrote: post #95
Jun8 wrote: post #86

What's really the problem with this situation is that it's really hard to point a finger to a single culprit in the system thereby pointing to a way to solve the problem. That's why it's a wicked problem ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wicked_problem ) * The doctors cannot be blamed because they want to protect themselves (e.g. see the insane amounts of insurance required to practice medicine in the US to guard agains…

Mostly agree. Except, the politicians ARE to blame! We need spined, "sensical" statesmen leading our government to workable solutions, not self-fish, egotistical wimps working towards "getting the meanest/loudest 'animal(s)' off our backs and getting re-elected". Tort reform is where I would start if I was working towards a solution. Tort reform is often not done because 90% (pulled from the air based on recollection…

You are, of course, right but up to a point: I believe in situations where politicians are widely blamed, the real problem lies elsewhere (typical example: EU economic crises). Politicians are trying to operate under many different constraints, economic, populist, etc., some do a better job than others.

In order to break the chicken and egg problem, a more effective way, I think, is to inform the public. For example, in this case how many people have even thought about what that consent signature means (I signed a form like that just yesterday) but if the consequences are made widely known than the public may pressurize the politicians to make changes. Nothing gets the attention of those guys as public opinion.

Re: My Doctor's Office Asked Me To Lie

#102

Post by roc »

techdmn wrote: post #43
jrs235 wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Additionally, what about the fact that if the woman knew the Privacy Policy was 3000 pages and in a binder (which she claimed to be aware of) and knowingly accepts a statement she strongly believes to be untrue? Is this enough to invalidate the "contract" because it is blatantly known that full disclosure and meeting of the minds has not been met? This also comes to mind during mortgages and car loans. Often the clos…

I the first time I closed on a house, realizing ten minutes in that either I was going to be signing contracts without reading them, or everyone was going to be sitting around watching me read for three hours. There's a lot of pressure in a situation like that, even though I try never to sign anything without reading it.

Sadly enough, professional negotiators regularly leverage social pressure on people who don't negotiate professionally.

It's effective precisely because you don't expect it to be used as a weapon against you.

Re: My Doctor's Office Asked Me To Lie

#103

Post by Tyrannosaurs »

wccrawford wrote: post #49
stordoff wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There usually is no need for them to sign it. They offer, you accept (with your signature as evidence), which is the essence of a contract. There is no need for them to "accept your acceptance". As you changed the document, it may or may not be binding. Effectively you offered them new terms, and I wouldn't like to speculate as to if they accepted them (e.g. by treating you).

They need to accept the changes, if any. The lack of a place for them to sign is proof that they intended for it to be signed as-is, or not at all. Contracts aren't valid unless both parties have accepted them. The doctor's office can't accept a contract they haven't read yet, and any changes to a contract make it a new contract.

If they go ahead and treat him and their policy is only to treat patients who've signed it that's likely to be acceptance by action.

Re: My Doctor's Office Asked Me To Lie

#104

Post by vacri »

pessimizer wrote: post #79
vacri wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He did, in relating 'the story' on his website, which is why I phrased it that way.

No, he said that he was told that it was 3000 pages long, but never saw it, which was the point.

I wish the downmod brigade would actually read what I wrote. I'm not calling Stallman a liar. I'm saying he may have made a mistake in telling the story. It happens. I also said that it was more likely that the receptionist made up the number to scare him off.

If you read an article, the author is responsible for putting the words in it, whatever the original source is. The author can make mistakes, because authors are human. I'm just saying that it's a possibility he misquoted the number in his article, a possibility I stated to be less likely than other other source I suggested.

I understand the point of the article. I was responding to a couple of comments that were acting like this 3000-word thing was real, when it clearly isn't, and drawing conclusions about how crazy beaurocracy has become that documents get so long.

Re: My Doctor's Office Asked Me To Lie

#106

Post by jrs235 »

Jun8 wrote: post #101
jrs235 wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Mostly agree. Except, the politicians ARE to blame! We need spined, "sensical" statesmen leading our government to workable solutions, not self-fish, egotistical wimps working towards "getting the meanest/loudest 'animal(s)' off our backs and getting re-elected". Tort reform is where I would start if I was working towards a solution. Tort reform is often not done because 90% (pulled from the air based on recollection…

You are, of course, right but up to a point: I believe in situations where politicians are widely blamed, the real problem lies elsewhere (typical example: EU economic crises). Politicians are trying to operate under many different constraints, economic, populist, etc., some do a better job than others. In order to break the chicken and egg problem, a more effective way, I think, is to inform the public. For example,…

Agreed. Our education system, K-12, is abysmal. We need to be teaching general law and legal issues to all people 16 and older! How many people understand the different law domains (natural, common, statutory, civil, criminal, etc..) and their orders of application?

Additionally if the organizations obtaining signatures knew the people signing them knew the law and what's binding, they might actually ensure that things are done correctly and mindfully since the odds of a signature (and contract) being challenged is greatly increased.

Re: My Doctor's Office Asked Me To Lie

#107

Post by casualreader »

Re:

"There is no real confidentiality of medical records in the US, since the police can get them under very easy conditions."

Very true. And sometimes police can obtain information without even having to ask.

I work for a regional pharmacy outlet and it is the company policy to transmit Pseudoephedrine (PSE) Sales Log Records to the local police department every week.

After writing a memo stating customers/patients should be at least given an informed consent that the information they are required by law to provide in order to purchase PSE is then released to the local police department - an act not required by law. I was told that PSE sales information is not considered Protected Health Information under HIPAA and thus not a breach of Federal privacy law. Granted since PSE is an over-the-counter product its purchase does not technically qualify as a 'medical record'. However, because PSE is purchased 'behind-the-counter' at pharmacies in the U.S. I believe there is a reasonable expectation of privacy on the public's part in this regard.

The Board of Pharmacy in an e-mail clarification to this memo did not address HIPAA compliance but merely stated that the methamphetamine unit officers were 'approved' to receive such information and for all pharmacies to please kindly comply with their ongoing methamphetamine combating efforts.

I've taken a personal policy to comply with the company policy - having higher educational debt cheapens the price of selling one's self - but to openly share what is done with the records if asked. So far no one has ever asked me what is done with the records.

Re: My Doctor's Office Asked Me To Lie

#108

Post by lesterbuck »

techdmn wrote: post #43
jrs235 wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Additionally, what about the fact that if the woman knew the Privacy Policy was 3000 pages and in a binder (which she claimed to be aware of) and knowingly accepts a statement she strongly believes to be untrue? Is this enough to invalidate the "contract" because it is blatantly known that full disclosure and meeting of the minds has not been met? This also comes to mind during mortgages and car loans. Often the clos…

I the first time I closed on a house, realizing ten minutes in that either I was going to be signing contracts without reading them, or everyone was going to be sitting around watching me read for three hours. There's a lot of pressure in a situation like that, even though I try never to sign anything without reading it.

I sat through some classes on how title companies worked, and the closer (the person at the title company who manages the entire process) refers to you as a "reader." Somewhat unusual, but not that uncommon. (I was a reader when I bought my house years ago.) RESPA requires that all significant costs be listed on a sheet available 24 hours before closing, and you can press your rights on that, though it may delay your closing by one day. That gives you the time to read all the documents before everyone collects in person. And everyone does not need to be in the same room at the same time, of course. Closing documents may be FEDEXed around the world, if necessary, and some real estate investing dual closings (flips) very much depend on everyone NOT seeing all the documents.

Re: My Doctor's Office Asked Me To Lie

#109

Post by gisikw »

spolsky wrote: post #85
techdmn wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I the first time I closed on a house, realizing ten minutes in that either I was going to be signing contracts without reading them, or everyone was going to be sitting around watching me read for three hours. There's a lot of pressure in a situation like that, even though I try never to sign anything without reading it.

Did you have a lawyer to represent you? That's their job... to make sure that the contract you're signing is OK. Actually reading a contract without knowledge of the law, case history, and background can get you into just as much trouble as not reading it at all. That's why you have lawyers review important contracts.

Having your lawyer read something is no excuse for not also reading it yourself.

Re: My Doctor's Office Asked Me To Lie

#110

Post by pasbesoin »

This is a principal reason society need effective regulation: So that one does not need a fucking lawyer for every daily transaction.

Practices (meaning behaviors, not medical offices) like this should be shut down before they ever see the light of day, and confuse, inconvenience, and compromise the safety and integrity of thousands.

Post reply on HN