should the press be exempt from adhering to HIPAA laws?

[1wellnessnurse]

Jason Pierre-Paul Lost His Finger. Did ESPN Violate HIPAA By Reporting It?

Here's the link to the article:

Jason Pierre-Paul Lost His Finger. Did ESPN Violate HIPAA By Reporting It? - Forbes

Jason Pierre-Paul, the star defensive end for the NFL's New York Giants, had one of his fingers amputated on Wednesday, ESPNreported.

It seems a hospital employee sold the protected health information to a reporter. I have no doubt that they will catch the hospital employee. My concern is that the reporter also stepped over the line and should also be punished. This is about more than an athlete who had his privacy violated; it's about the press being above the law.

Tell me what you think!

[Horseshoe, BSN, RN]

The press is not bound by HIPAA, so they didn't officially do anything wrong at all. Now from an ethical perspective, one could certainly make an argument against it.

If Aunt May is walking through a hospital and sees her friend Mary in a room with a big cast on her leg and tells her other friend Susie that Mary is in the hospital with a broken leg, she has not violated HIPAA because she is not bound by it.

[TheCommuter, BSN, RN]

I personally feel that no one, not even those who work for mass media outlets in television and newspapers, should be exempt from respecting peoples' privacy.

[elkpark]

I personally feel that no one, not even those who work for mass media outlets in television and newspapers, should be exempt from respecting peoples' privacy.

I agree with you about that, but that's a v. different issue than whether a reporter "violated HIPAA." And, really, what would the point of the press be if they were obligated to "respect people's privacy"? Itsn't that kinda the point of the press?

[Purple_roses]

The reporter received information by paying someone to break the law. That's not just overhearing that the athlete lost a finger and reporting it--that would be different. Paying someone to break a law should be illegal.

[Altra, BSN, RN]

Disseminating information, as long as it is factual, is the function of a free press.

The HIPAA violator is the person who provided information on the patient to an individual or entity not involved in the patient's care.

[1wellnessnurse]

The press is not bound by HIPAA, so they didn't officially do anything wrong at all. Now from an ethical perspective, one could certainly make an argument against it.

If Aunt May is walking through a hospital and sees her friend Mary in a room with a big cast on her leg and tells her other friend Susie that Mary is in the hospital with a broken leg, she has not violated HIPAA because she is not bound by it.

I like your example Horseshoe.

I think this case is more sinister than the Aunt May example. The reporter bribed a hospital employee for protected health information. In essence he knowingly posted stolen information that he had no right to see or share. It is so completely unethical, I actually got very mad when I read the original article.

[Been there,done that, ASN, RN]

The press is above the law. Ever hear of "freedom of the press" ? The reporter's just doing what reporter's do. What ever way he obtained the information, he is not bound by HIPAA. Now, the employee that sold the information is greedy, and not very bright.

[meanmaryjean, DNP, RN]

While most assuredly unethical and just plain wrong, the reporter is not bound by HIPAA nor any part of it.

The employee is in a world of hurt, however.

[elkpark]

I like your example Horseshoe.

I think this case is more sinister than the Aunt May example. The reporter bribed a hospital employee for protected health information. In essence he knowingly posted stolen information that he had no right to see or share. It is so completely unethical, I actually got very mad when I read the original article.

The reporter received information by paying someone to break the law. That's not just overhearing that the athlete lost a finger and reporting it--that would be different. Paying someone to break a law should be illegal.

None of us here know the details, but I would bet big bucks that what actually happened is that nobody bribed or otherwise compelled anyone. I would bet that what happened is that the employee had made the decision (of her/his own free will) to sell the info and was shopping it around to the highest bidder. ESPN just ended up offering the most money. News organizations pay for info, or for people to appear on TV news shows, all the time.

[JustBeachyNurse, LPN]

To answer the thread title the press is exempt from HIPAA as they are not covered entities nor do they bill insurance. The one screen shot included another patient's name that they had no right to obtain or share by publication. The innocent patient may have more of a case against the reporter than the professional athlete. The athlete has a potential claim against the facility and whomever leaked confidential patient information. The other patients into has been removed but it still was out there

[NurseIndependa]

I personally feel that no one, not even those who work for mass media outlets in television and newspapers, should be exempt from respecting peoples' privacy.

Absolutely agree. But the press really lacks any dignity, especially when it comes to respecting privacy.

For the healthcare employee who sold the information, I hope it was worth it because you are screwed!