please help with this assignment

WEEK 2 DISCUSSION 1

Option 2: Patient Rights-Assisted Suicide Review the Dr. Jack Kevorkian’s “60 Minutes” Interview video.

Research and discuss physician assisted suicide. 

Pick a side on this argument and explain why you selected that particular side using scholarly research to support your decision.

Explain how this view would address the case of Dr. Kevorkian? In your post, explain whether you believe Dr. Kevorkian was a hero or a murderer?

(Remember, there is no correct answer to this question…but support your opinion with research and facts). Your initial response should be at least 250 words.  

Bustillos, D. (2013). Healthcare ethics and medical law. San Diego, CA: Bridgepoint Education Inc. https://content.edu/books/AUHCA322.13

(2012).  Electronic health records: Privacy and security  [Video file]. Retrieved from http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CgIqWpNK5fo

WEEK 2 Discussion 2: UTUBE VIDEO

The Case: Christina Perry, who was both a patient and an employee of Ashford Hospital, alleged that her protected health information (PHI) was impermissibly disclosed to his/her supervisor. Ashford Hospital distributed an Operating Room (OR) schedule to employees via email; the hospital’s OR schedule contained information about his/her upcoming surgery. Information disclosed included, but was not limited to, Social Security number, birthdate, age, residence, insurance and/or payment information, former surgeries, former and current medications, past medical conditions, primary care physician, personal psychiatrist, and other health professionals that he/she had seen throughout the past year. The supervisor was not part of the OR team or treatment team but was a considered to be in a senior administrative position within the facility.

The Suit: Christina Perry is suing Ashford Hospital for the improper release of her health information, protected under the Privacy Rule

The Plaintiff: Christina Perry The Defendant: Ashford Hospital (represented by a Sarah Fields)

THANK YOU, CHRISTINA AND SARAH, FOR VOLUNTEERING!!!

The remaining class members will become the jury.  The plaintiff and defendant are exempt from response post requirements for this forum.  They only need to build a strong case in their favor via their initial video post.  Each participant: the plaintiff, defendant, and jury members, will create their initial post using a YouTube video to explain their case and/or reasoning.  Review the YouTube Webcam Quick-Start Guide for instructions on how to create a YouTube account and YouTube video post using your computer’s webcam.

Jurors (the remainder of the class): Research the case, as well as the legal and ethical standards surrounding the issues from both sides. View the videos from both the plaintiff and defendant and in your video post, argue for your decision; to rule either in favor of the Plaintiff or Defendant. You will present your decision in a 5-minute video explaining the rationale behind your decision. Post the link to your video in the discussion forum along with your reference list by Day 5. The Jurors posts are due by Day 5 (Saturday), after viewing the Plaintiff’s and Defendant’s posts from Day 3 (e.g., the Plaintiff and Defendant must post by Day 3 so that the Jurors have time to respond by Day 5). Juror Response Posts: By the end of Day 7, review the decisions by your fellow jurors. Respond to two jurors – one who ruled in favor of the Plaintiff and one who ruled in favor of the Defendant (e.g., if you ruled in favor of the Plaintiff, you must respond to one juror who ruled in favor of the Defendant and one who ruled in favor of the Plaintiff). Discuss your agreement or disagreement with their decision and present additional facts to support your argument. Your

responses must be a minimum of 100 words. The students who portrayed the Plaintiff and the Defendant are exempt from response posts.

RESPONSES :

#1 I am a Juror in this case and have sided with the Plaintiff.  You have done an great job in your defense in defending Ashford Hospital in this case.  However, this case is about an individual privacy being violated and no one should be subject to this act. This employee/plaintiff very personal information was clearly disclosed to unauthorized individuals. The Privacy Act governs the protection of an individual. The rights to see records about ones selves subject to privacy act exemption.  As Ashford Hospital stated "Privacy is one of its core value".  Clearly, their core value has been breached and is in violation of the patient  rights under the HIPPA Privacy Rules.

#2In your defense for the Respondent, you presented a almost solid case in its defense.  First, each and every one has the right to their personal privacy. As stated in  the complaint brought forward by the plaintiff, her immediate supervisor was not part of the Plaintiff OR or treatment team.  She was her supervisor and a Administrator, she should not have had no access to the plaintiff personal medical record. She could easily use information in her file against her.  I would be very offended to know that my manager is surfing through my personal medical records and I do not know any thing about hers.

This plaintiff privacy was violated under the privacy rules, which was passed and enacted in 2000, and put in place to provide protection against the misuse of personal health information. (U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, 2000).