Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login

Site Notices
1/22/2020 12:12:56 PM
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 2
Posted: 1/19/2015 10:38:00 AM EST


Would a patient be within the law to record his phone or office conversation w/o doctors knowledge?
Link Posted: 1/19/2015 10:38:37 AM EST
Originally Posted By WildApple:



Would a patient be within the law to record his phone or office conversation w/o doctors knowledge?
View Quote


Depends on your local/state laws.
Link Posted: 1/19/2015 10:38:52 AM EST
Check your local state laws
Link Posted: 1/19/2015 10:39:12 AM EST
Originally Posted By WildApple:
Would a patient be within the law to record his phone or office conversation w/o doctors knowledge?
View Quote


Probably depends on state law? Unless there's a HIPPA element that I'm not aware of.
Link Posted: 1/19/2015 10:40:01 AM EST

What is it you intend to record?
Link Posted: 1/19/2015 10:41:51 AM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By red_on_black:

What is it you intend to record?
View Quote

Document
Link Posted: 1/19/2015 10:43:25 AM EST
Most of the laws are written so a person can record a conversation they are directly involved in.

One would need a warrant to record the conversation of two other people.

Generally speaking, one party involved in the conversation must know it's being recorded.

It is dependent on local laws.
Link Posted: 1/19/2015 10:43:35 AM EST
In FL it's not legal. Not sure about your state OP.
Link Posted: 1/19/2015 10:46:02 AM EST
Link Posted: 1/19/2015 10:48:13 AM EST
Originally Posted By WildApple:



Would a patient be within the law to record his phone or office conversation w/o doctors knowledge?
View Quote


Depends on the state due to 'wiretapping laws'. However, you will be an 'ex' patient very quickly once words gets around the medical community that you are targeting physicians.
Link Posted: 1/19/2015 10:48:27 AM EST
Why not just start the conversation with "by the way, my memory is terrible so I'll be recording this conversation" since credit card companies do it all the time.
Link Posted: 1/19/2015 10:50:08 AM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By WildApple:

Document
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By WildApple:
Originally Posted By red_on_black:

What is it you intend to record?

Document

Are you planning on suing in case your reassignment surgery doesn't work out?

Link Posted: 1/19/2015 10:51:23 AM EST
[Last Edit: 1/19/2015 10:51:30 AM EST by Mikhail_86]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By devilskwerl:
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By devilskwerl:
Originally Posted By WildApple:
Originally Posted By red_on_black:

What is it you intend to record?

Document

Are you planning on suing in case your reassignment surgery doesn't work out?


He can always date FlatDarkErf after though so there's that
Link Posted: 1/19/2015 10:51:41 AM EST
Link Posted: 1/19/2015 10:52:13 AM EST
Depends on what State. Some it's OK, some it's felony "wiretap".
Link Posted: 1/19/2015 10:53:28 AM EST
New York makes it a crime to record to record or eavesdrop on an in-person or telephone conversation unless one party to the conversation consents. N.Y. Penal Law §§ 250.00, 250.05.

California makes it a crime to record or eavesdrop on any confidential communication, including a private conversation or telephone call, without the consent of all parties to the conversation. See Cal. Penal Code § 632.
View Quote
Either way, this thread is creepy.

«tc2k11»
Link Posted: 1/19/2015 10:57:57 AM EST
In Texas it is legal as long as one of the parties is aware of the recording.
Link Posted: 1/19/2015 11:00:08 AM EST
Link Posted: 1/19/2015 11:03:53 AM EST
Going off of your last arfcom recorded state of residence...

Pennsylvania's wiretapping law is a "two-party consent" law. Pennsylvania makes it a crime to intercept or record a telephone call or conversation unless all parties to the conversation consent. See 18 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 5703 (link is to the entire code, choose Title 18, Part II, Article F, Chapter 57, Subchapter B, and then the specific provision).
View Quote
Link.

«tc2k11»
Link Posted: 1/19/2015 11:11:25 AM EST
I am aware of an instance where two family members were in a doctors appointment for a child who was also present. Critical patient interveiw facts were stated by family members, and then when the doctor typed up his report that is the medical record, Key elements of those critical facts stated were missing from the medical record. The doctors omission of important facts from the record became Direct cause of a case being opened by the Department of Child and Family Services against the family.

Had the doctor not edited what was important factual details, there never would have been a case for the State Department of Child and Family Services to open in the first place. Those family members were malpracticed against by the doctors bad reporting. They are writing a request to get the medical record corrected. But will likely only end up with a small note at the bottom of the medical record stating that patient disagrees with something, because if the records department of the medical office made the correct changes to the medical record, that would be an admission of wrongdoing, so they would never do that even though it is the right thing to do.

So sure some people might say they don't like the idea of recording interactions with healthcare professionals, but if those healthcare professionals slip up in the slightest way in their care and recordkeeping for you, you the patient will get fucked and have little recourse. So why not have some recorded evidence to keep everybody honest?
Link Posted: 1/19/2015 11:17:32 AM EST
Link Posted: 1/19/2015 11:19:55 AM EST
Here in NV, yes. Audio only.
Link Posted: 1/19/2015 11:27:05 AM EST
[Last Edit: 1/19/2015 11:27:43 AM EST by DeltaElite777]
Serious question here....

If you have a trust issue with someone to the point of recording them without his/her knowledge, do you really want them working on you as a physician? Fuck that noise, I'm finding a new doctor.
Link Posted: 1/19/2015 11:29:42 AM EST
If you distrust a doctor that much - WTF are you doing using that doctor?
Link Posted: 1/19/2015 11:29:59 AM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By DeltaElite777:
Serious question here....

If you have a trust issue with someone to the point of recording them without his/her knowledge, do you really want them working on you as a physician? Fuck that noise, I'm finding a new doctor.
View Quote

Agreed, unless you're looking for a payday.

«tc2k11»
Link Posted: 1/19/2015 11:32:40 AM EST
[Last Edit: 1/19/2015 11:36:00 AM EST by WildApple]
What if the patient makes the phone call from a single party consent state across state lines to the doctor office in a dual party consent state?


Link Posted: 1/19/2015 11:34:50 AM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By WildApple:
What if the patient makes the phone call from a single party consent state across state lines to the doctor office in a dual party consent state?
View Quote

What are you trying to accomplish here?

«tc2k11»
Link Posted: 1/19/2015 11:36:20 AM EST
[Last Edit: 1/19/2015 11:36:54 AM EST by WildApple]
This may or may not be related to my grandmother's recent botched eye surgery in which she was recently blinded in one eye
Link Posted: 1/19/2015 11:37:33 AM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By WildApple:
This may or may not be related to my grandmother's recent botched eye surgery
View Quote

You should probably talk to a lawyer, then.

«tc2k11»
Link Posted: 1/19/2015 11:39:12 AM EST
Link Posted: 1/19/2015 11:40:42 AM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By WildApple:
This may or may not be related to my grandmother's recent botched eye surgery in which she was recently blinded in one eye
View Quote

So your plan is to call up a physician and try and trick him into admitting, over the phone,
that he deliberately screwed up an operation?

I'm sure that will work out exactly the way you imagine it will.


Link Posted: 1/19/2015 11:41:32 AM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By WildApple:
This may or may not be related to my grandmother's recent botched eye surgery in which she was recently blinded in one eye
View Quote


I presume this one:
http://www.ar15.com/forums/t_1_5/1706981_Doctor_sending_my_grandma_bill_for_botched_cataract_surgery.html

Are you POA for your Grandmother or did she give permission for you to get her health info?

Regardless of the ability to record it, you're asking the Doctor to violate HIPPA if you are not allowed the information.

Link Posted: 1/19/2015 11:50:00 AM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Concentricity:
I am aware of an instance where two family members were in a doctors appointment for a child who was also present. Critical patient interveiw facts were stated by family members, and then when the doctor typed up his report that is the medical record, Key elements of those critical facts stated were missing from the medical record. The doctors omission of important facts from the record became Direct cause of a case being opened by the Department of Child and Family Services against the family.

Had the doctor not edited what was important factual details, there never would have been a case for the State Department of Child and Family Services to open in the first place. Those family members were malpracticed against by the doctors bad reporting. They are writing a request to get the medical record corrected. But will likely only end up with a small note at the bottom of the medical record stating that patient disagrees with something, because if the records department of the medical office made the correct changes to the medical record, that would be an admission of wrongdoing, so they would never do that even though it is the right thing to do.

So sure some people might say they don't like the idea of recording interactions with healthcare professionals, but if those healthcare professionals slip up in the slightest way in their care and recordkeeping for you, you the patient will get fucked and have little recourse. So why not have some recorded evidence to keep everybody honest?
View Quote


An incomplete record would net set off CPS, so there has got to be more to the story.
Link Posted: 1/19/2015 1:21:44 PM EST
Would Google Glasses be illegal to use in dual consent law areas then?

Seems the laws need updated
Link Posted: 1/19/2015 1:37:06 PM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By NavyDoc1:

An incomplete record would net set off CPS, so there has got to be more to the story.
View Quote

Not necessarily.

His version:
"My son Bobby has a cold, could you check him out? What, these marks on my arm? Oh no, that was me accidentally dropping a cigarette, causing a few burns. And this other mark is from the time when I accidentally stabbed myself with a nail putting up a painting of my son. My wife thinks I'm deliberately being clumsy to get out of house work."

Doctor's incomplete record:
"My son Bobby has... cigarette... burns... from the time when I... stabbed... my son... deliberately..."


Link Posted: 1/19/2015 2:06:47 PM EST
Link Posted: 1/19/2015 2:11:46 PM EST
If I wear a shirt that says I may be recording all interactions, and you talk to me, isn't that implied consent?
Link Posted: 1/19/2015 2:19:42 PM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By NavyDoc1:


An incomplete record would net set off CPS, so there has got to be more to the story.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By NavyDoc1:
Originally Posted By Concentricity:
I am aware of an instance where two family members were in a doctors appointment for a child who was also present. Critical patient interveiw facts were stated by family members, and then when the doctor typed up his report that is the medical record, Key elements of those critical facts stated were missing from the medical record. The doctors omission of important facts from the record became Direct cause of a case being opened by the Department of Child and Family Services against the family.

Had the doctor not edited what was important factual details, there never would have been a case for the State Department of Child and Family Services to open in the first place. Those family members were malpracticed against by the doctors bad reporting. They are writing a request to get the medical record corrected. But will likely only end up with a small note at the bottom of the medical record stating that patient disagrees with something, because if the records department of the medical office made the correct changes to the medical record, that would be an admission of wrongdoing, so they would never do that even though it is the right thing to do.

So sure some people might say they don't like the idea of recording interactions with healthcare professionals, but if those healthcare professionals slip up in the slightest way in their care and recordkeeping for you, you the patient will get fucked and have little recourse. So why not have some recorded evidence to keep everybody honest?


An incomplete record would net set off CPS, so there has got to be more to the story.


Oh yeah? I'll sum it up for you.
Title of medical record should've said: "child MAY have ingested alcohol".
Doctor titled it: "child ingested alcohol".
A fingerprick blood sugar test was performed and found blood sugar level to be in normal level range. Had the blood sugar tested low, than a blood alcohol content test would be warranted to be performed. No further action was taken and the child was discharged. The state has no case about the child actually having ingested any alcohol because test showed the child hadn't.

However since the doctor fucked up the title of the medical record problem, and also omitted other supporting details, The medical record asserts an assumption that a potential crime had been committed, when a crime had not in fact been committed. so then the people go home and there's a knock on the door and who do you think it is?
"Hi my name's David Carlson from the state of Connecticut Department of children and family services, i work for the government and I'm here to help!
Why don't you be a nice parent, Open the door and let me in, and answer some nice incriminating questions! "
The family retained an attorney the next day after realizing how bad shit just got. It's still not over yet.

So NavyDoc1, now that you have all of the background information, would you say there really was more to the story, or did I really sum up pretty truthfully saying it was an incomplete medical record and was a malpractice?
When you assert that there's more to the story, you're essentially calling bullshit on somebody.
Link Posted: 1/19/2015 2:20:53 PM EST
Yo dawg! I heard you like HIPPA violations, so I'm giving you a HIPPA violation for violating your own patient privacy!
Link Posted: 1/19/2015 2:24:02 PM EST
I'm hoping this turns out as entertaining as the guy that wanted to sit in on his wife's surgery to make sure she didn't get molested.
Link Posted: 1/19/2015 2:31:42 PM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By SmilingBandit:
I'm hoping this turns out as entertaining as the guy that wanted to sit in on his wife's surgery to make sure she didn't get molested.
View Quote

Link??Sounds epic.... my free search sucks.
Link Posted: 1/19/2015 2:32:14 PM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By devilskwerl:

Are you planning on suing in case your reassignment surgery doesn't work out?

View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By devilskwerl:
Originally Posted By WildApple:
Originally Posted By red_on_black:

What is it you intend to record?

Document

Are you planning on suing in case your reassignment surgery doesn't work out?




Because sometimes conversations get very detailed and you would like the record to go back and listen to. I did that with my dads oncologist. he didnt care. There is information being discussed that i will need to research later to better understand. I dont want to waste his time in asking stupid questions i can figure out for my self later.
Link Posted: 1/19/2015 2:32:38 PM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By DRich:


Depends on your local/state laws.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By DRich:
Originally Posted By WildApple:



Would a patient be within the law to record his phone or office conversation w/o doctors knowledge?


Depends on your local/state laws.


This. In Iowa I believe only 1 party has to know, so you would be ok doing so
Link Posted: 1/19/2015 2:32:57 PM EST
Link Posted: 1/19/2015 2:37:58 PM EST
[Last Edit: 1/19/2015 2:51:18 PM EST by medicine_man]
And people wonder why our medical system is so fucked up.

ETA: The ridiculous cost, the time involved with the burden of documentation, the increasing doctor shortage, etc. They all at least in part stem from the fact that people want airline standards applied to medicine as if humans walked off an assembly line when that simply isn't possible.

And if it doesn't happen then doctors either get sued or, apparently, secretly recorded with the intention to be sued or extorted in some way.

So when you bitch about wait times, medical costs, and government intervention (control) of medical decision making, remember this thread.
Link Posted: 1/19/2015 3:31:41 PM EST
Link Posted: 1/19/2015 3:43:27 PM EST
[Last Edit: 1/19/2015 3:48:21 PM EST by Concentricity]
The doctors employer, a hospital reported.
Edit: the doctor stated he would be turning in the referral personally, that he was real sorry to need to do that, but he could lose his job at the hospital if he didn't.
Link Posted: 1/19/2015 3:59:27 PM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Rogue_UK:

Not necessarily.

His version:
"My son Bobby has a cold, could you check him out? What, these marks on my arm? Oh no, that was me accidentally dropping a cigarette, causing a few burns. And this other mark is from the time when I accidentally stabbed myself with a nail putting up a painting of my son. My wife thinks I'm deliberately being clumsy to get out of house work."

Doctor's incomplete record:
"My son Bobby has... cigarette... burns... from the time when I... stabbed... my son... deliberately..."


View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Rogue_UK:
Originally Posted By NavyDoc1:

An incomplete record would net set off CPS, so there has got to be more to the story.

Not necessarily.

His version:
"My son Bobby has a cold, could you check him out? What, these marks on my arm? Oh no, that was me accidentally dropping a cigarette, causing a few burns. And this other mark is from the time when I accidentally stabbed myself with a nail putting up a painting of my son. My wife thinks I'm deliberately being clumsy to get out of house work."

Doctor's incomplete record:
"My son Bobby has... cigarette... burns... from the time when I... stabbed... my son... deliberately..."




LOL. Okay, okay, you win.
Link Posted: 1/19/2015 4:00:06 PM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Concentricity:
The doctors employer, a hospital reported.
Edit: the doctor stated he would be turning in the referral personally, that he was real sorry to need to do that, but he could lose his job at the hospital if he didn't.
View Quote



From your story, it sounds like it wouldn't have mattered. If doc put "kid ingested alcohol" vs. "kid may have ingested alcohol", there is still a question about a kid ingesting alcohol.

Also keep in mind that some hospital's will activate CPS or social work referrals for very little, due to the ramifications of something horrible happening down the line and the investigation shows that "hey, 6 months ago, the doctor was concerned that the kid MIGHT have ingested alcohol. Now that kid is dead from abuse". Who do you think gets left holding the bag in that case? So if there is anything that might even look like a red flag on paper, an initial interview or look-see, which is usually done at the home, gets ordered.

Now if after that first interview, there's still something happening, it's because that social worker saw or heard something that raised more red flags. I've been privy to enough of these to know that they get ordered for BS sometimes and most social workers are really good at seeing that for what it is, and knowing when something was just plain an accident, and not pursuing anything further. They even tend to be more forgiving and push things less than some doctors.

So if this was all because of a questionable ingestion, and the initial interview revealed a well-to-do family without any other concerns regarding the home or family situation, it would have likely ended there. But hey, it's the internet. So everyone we all know is completely innocent of any wrong doing ever and we all live in mansions and it's always the doctor's fault.
Link Posted: 1/19/2015 4:02:13 PM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Concentricity:


Oh yeah? I'll sum it up for you.
Title of medical record should've said: "child MAY have ingested alcohol".
Doctor titled it: "child ingested alcohol".
A fingerprick blood sugar test was performed and found blood sugar level to be in normal level range. Had the blood sugar tested low, than a blood alcohol content test would be warranted to be performed. No further action was taken and the child was discharged. The state has no case about the child actually having ingested any alcohol because test showed the child hadn't.

However since the doctor fucked up the title of the medical record problem, and also omitted other supporting details, The medical record asserts an assumption that a potential crime had been committed, when a crime had not in fact been committed. so then the people go home and there's a knock on the door and who do you think it is?
"Hi my name's David Carlson from the state of Connecticut Department of children and family services, i work for the government and I'm here to help!
Why don't you be a nice parent, Open the door and let me in, and answer some nice incriminating questions! "
The family retained an attorney the next day after realizing how bad shit just got. It's still not over yet.

So NavyDoc1, now that you have all of the background information, would you say there really was more to the story, or did I really sum up pretty truthfully saying it was an incomplete medical record and was a malpractice?
When you assert that there's more to the story, you're essentially calling bullshit on somebody.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Concentricity:
Originally Posted By NavyDoc1:
Originally Posted By Concentricity:
I am aware of an instance where two family members were in a doctors appointment for a child who was also present. Critical patient interveiw facts were stated by family members, and then when the doctor typed up his report that is the medical record, Key elements of those critical facts stated were missing from the medical record. The doctors omission of important facts from the record became Direct cause of a case being opened by the Department of Child and Family Services against the family.

Had the doctor not edited what was important factual details, there never would have been a case for the State Department of Child and Family Services to open in the first place. Those family members were malpracticed against by the doctors bad reporting. They are writing a request to get the medical record corrected. But will likely only end up with a small note at the bottom of the medical record stating that patient disagrees with something, because if the records department of the medical office made the correct changes to the medical record, that would be an admission of wrongdoing, so they would never do that even though it is the right thing to do.

So sure some people might say they don't like the idea of recording interactions with healthcare professionals, but if those healthcare professionals slip up in the slightest way in their care and recordkeeping for you, you the patient will get fucked and have little recourse. So why not have some recorded evidence to keep everybody honest?


An incomplete record would net set off CPS, so there has got to be more to the story.


Oh yeah? I'll sum it up for you.
Title of medical record should've said: "child MAY have ingested alcohol".
Doctor titled it: "child ingested alcohol".
A fingerprick blood sugar test was performed and found blood sugar level to be in normal level range. Had the blood sugar tested low, than a blood alcohol content test would be warranted to be performed. No further action was taken and the child was discharged. The state has no case about the child actually having ingested any alcohol because test showed the child hadn't.

However since the doctor fucked up the title of the medical record problem, and also omitted other supporting details, The medical record asserts an assumption that a potential crime had been committed, when a crime had not in fact been committed. so then the people go home and there's a knock on the door and who do you think it is?
"Hi my name's David Carlson from the state of Connecticut Department of children and family services, i work for the government and I'm here to help!
Why don't you be a nice parent, Open the door and let me in, and answer some nice incriminating questions! "
The family retained an attorney the next day after realizing how bad shit just got. It's still not over yet.

So NavyDoc1, now that you have all of the background information, would you say there really was more to the story, or did I really sum up pretty truthfully saying it was an incomplete medical record and was a malpractice?
When you assert that there's more to the story, you're essentially calling bullshit on somebody.


A medical record does not automatically flag the CPS. Some person had to call it in. It could have read, "parents beat the child with a hammer" and CPS would not have gone to the door unless a person called in a concern.
Link Posted: 1/19/2015 4:04:12 PM EST
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 2
Top Top