JPP Suing ESPN and Schefter (1 Viewer)

[Tom Skerritt]

http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/14842513/jason-pierre-paul-new-york-giants-sues-espn-adam-schefter-posting-medical-records

And two people have already been fired for looking at his medical records at the Miami hospital. 

 

[Cjw_55106]

Obvious money grab as this isn't really personal IMO. Everyone knows what happened. In any case, the two employees should obviously be fired for HIPPA violations. As for Schefter and ESPN, I'm not sure Florida statute is applicable sine they aren't in Florida...but I'm not a lawyer. 

 

[Pots]

Obvious money grab as this isn't really personal IMO.

I disagree completely. It's not about whether the specifics of the info are going to get out or not on their own, but the fact that a news organization illegally obtains your medical records info and posts it on twitter for the world to see without your consent. That's a pretty big deal imo and DEFINITELY personal. 

 

[Cjw_55106]

Going to get out? We already knew his finger was amputated. 

 

[Soulfly3]

Schefter needed a little toning down. Good for JPP

 

[GregR]

Not sure I have any problem with it.  I don't want someone to be able to illegally obtain my medical records and publish them to the world either. I'm not sure reporting "according to a source" should be restricted, but actually publishing the medical records themselves I have no problem restricting.

Money grab... not sure if I would call it that. The only way to see it doesn't happen again is to make them feel some hurt for having done it that they won't want to go through next time they are in that position.

Not sure if the state boundary stuff is an issue for the law. They published them to people in Florida, so I'd think it should apply, but not a lawyer.

 

[matttyl]

Once obtained, though, doesn't Schefter have a "journalistic obligation" to report the news.  Doesn't HIPAA not apply to those reporting the "news"?  (At least wasn't that Schefter's defense initially?)

 

[Soulfly3]

"sorry your honor, it was my journalistic obligation to snort those lines of coke and then write about it"

 

[GregR]

Once obtained, though, doesn't Schefter have a "journalistic obligation" to report the news.  Doesn't HIPAA not apply to those reporting the "news"?  (At least wasn't that Schefter's defense initially?)

My non-lawerly, guy with an internet connection who read up on it a little bit take... is that this is a state law issue and not a HIPAA issue.  Note the article says the suit is violation of the state's law.  HIPAA never appears in the article.

But, since I found it interesting, more on HIPAA:

http://www.firstamendmentcenter.org/hipaa-newsgathering

HIPAA applies only to businesses or agencies that bill or receive payment for health-care services or transmit information for payment in electronic form.

...

Health-care information the media obtains independently is not subject to HIPAA and may be published or broadcast freely, subject to limitations and internal policies on printing information about minors or the deceased.

An ambulance service that bills electronically is bound by HIPAA, but one that does everything on paper isn't. That was an actual example from one site.

Also important, HIPPA is superceded by state law.  If a state has a public information act that requires release to the public of information that HIPAA would forbid, then the state law wins out. It sounds like HIPAA is more of an issue for reporters obtaining information as those bound by HIPAA won't release it now, rather than whether they can disseminate it.

 

[matttyl]

Interesting. 

So, for instance, if I have a friend (who works at a hospital) who posted on facebook that they just treated a certain NFL football player and she was "gushing" - would that be a HIPAA violation, or some other violation?  True story by the way.

 

[massraider]

Obvious money grab as this isn't really personal IMO. Everyone knows what happened. In any case, the two employees should obviously be fired for HIPPA violations. As for Schefter and ESPN, I'm not sure Florida statute is applicable sine they aren't in Florida...but I'm not a lawyer. 

Yeah,  obvious money grab for a guy that had personal medical records stolen.

Should an NFL player wait for something more secret to be stolen before they sue?

Would that be a money grab as well?  Because really,  money isn't going to fix anything,  right? 

 

[Cjw_55106]

I didn't say any of that. My only point is, nothing private came out of it. We didn't learn he had some disease or cancerous tumors removed. We "found out" his finger was removed. One look at him could tell you that. He wasn't hurt by the revelation, neither physically of psychologically. 

 

[massraider]

That's a minor,  sorry little point you have.

 

[Cjw_55106]

That's fine. I'm sure Schefter will pay $0 when its all said and done. 

 

[matttyl]

Yeah,  obvious money grab for a guy that had personal medical records stolen.

Should an NFL player wait for something more secret to be stolen before they sue?

Would that be a money grab as well?  Because really,  money isn't going to fix anything,  right? 

Wasn't aware ESPN or Schefter was the one that stole them.  And was anything ever "stolen", or just reported? 

 

[Hawkeye21]

Shouldn't the hospital be responsible and not Schefter?  I don't think it's illegal to post info that's given to you.

 

[GregR]

Interesting. 

So, for instance, if I have a friend (who works at a hospital) who posted on facebook that they just treated a certain NFL football player and she was "gushing" - would that be a HIPAA violation, or some other violation?  True story by the way.

Not sure, would be interested to hear that as well. I'm not sure just how much patient information counts.

 

[GregR]

Shouldn't the hospital be responsible and not Schefter?  I don't think it's illegal to post info that's given to you.

According to the article, it is in Florida if that info is medical records.  See the wording they have there.

 

[Steed]

Interesting. 

So, for instance, if I have a friend (who works at a hospital) who posted on facebook that they just treated a certain NFL football player and she was "gushing" - would that be a HIPAA violation, or some other violation?  True story by the way.

Textbook hipaa violation and cause for termination.  All hospital workers receive annual training to prevent this and this is exactly the type of examplethey provide in the exam.

 

[dutch]

Wasn't aware ESPN or Schefter was the one that stole them.  And was anything ever "stolen", or just reported? 

Scheffter posted a pic of the actual medical record.  He had to have gotten it from somewhere and there is no way you get medical records without knowing someone somewhere did something wrong.  Scheffter was at least unethical.

 

[Shutout]

Scheffter posted a pic of the actual medical record.  He had to have gotten it from somewhere and there is no way you get medical records without knowing someone somewhere did something wrong.  Scheffter was at least unethical.

I know nothing about this other than what I just read here but I agree with the above post very much.  It can be sliced up and categorized any way we want to get technical about it but I think we ALL know here that something wrong was done.  None of us would want to contract a deadly disease or have an affair or rob a bank and want any part of it that is covered by privacy to be released. Its one thing to say a guy robbed a bank but another to release his personal info when he is only 15 and that is protected. 

At some point, people knew what they were looking at shouldn't be shared.  Its kind of like pirate streaming.  You choose to do it or not but YOU KNOW when you see Deadpool available on Kodi two days after it comes to theaters that you PROBABLY aren't on the right side of the law on this.

 

[tangfoot]

You choose to do it or not but YOU KNOW when you see Deadpool available on Kodi two days after it comes to theaters that you PROBABLY aren't on the right side of the law on this.

Exodus.  Kodi is just a platform. 

 

[Shutout]

Exodus.  Kodi is just a platform. 

Yes.  Very true.  Nothing wrong with Kodi, in and of itself.  I apologize for the lazy comparison

 

[matttyl]

Exodus.  Kodi is just a platform. 

Exactly.  I use Kodi to stream channels from my HD homerun prime - and to watch youtube clips.  Kodi is great.

 

[ShamrockPride]

I didn't say any of that. My only point is, nothing private came out of it. We didn't learn he had some disease or cancerous tumors removed. We "found out" his finger was removed. One look at him could tell you that. He wasn't hurt by the revelation, neither physically of psychologically. 

In the case you are making, it's a matter of principle. Sure, it's not a big deal this time. But they let it go now, who's to say "no" next time when a more private matter is revealed?

 

[Cjw_55106]

Yeah, I'm sure JPP is just looking out for the greater good. 

 

[ShamrockPride]

Yeah, I'm sure JPP is just looking out for the greater good. 

Probably not. He's looking out for security of his own private information. That just happens to include the greater good.

 

[Cjw_55106]

Well, he's barking up the wrong tree. Sue the hospital. Schefter and ESPN aren't losing money in this. 

 

[beef]

Obvious money grab as this isn't really personal IMO. Everyone knows what happened. In any case, the two employees should obviously be fired for HIPPA violations. As for Schefter and ESPN, I'm not sure Florida statute is applicable sine they aren't in Florida...but I'm not a lawyer. 

You're right about HIPPA.  Big time no no for those employees.

 

[GregR]

Well, he's barking up the wrong tree. Sue the hospital. Schefter and ESPN aren't losing money in this. 

Only have what the article says about the law in question (i.e. "The suit cites Florida statute 456.057(11), which says that third parties who obtain medical information are prohibited from further disclosing it without the written consent of the patient or a legal representative.").   But if there isn't more to the law, and if it doesn't matter that Schefter wasn't in Florida (I assume) when he tweeted it, it would seem like an open and shut case.  It might not end up amounting to a very big sum of money though.

 

[Bri]

My non-lawerly, guy with an internet connection who read up on it a little bit take... is that this is a state law issue and not a HIPAA issue.  Note the article says the suit is violation of the state's law.  HIPAA never appears in the article.

But, since I found it interesting, more on HIPAA:

http://www.firstamendmentcenter.org/hipaa-newsgathering

An ambulance service that bills electronically is bound by HIPAA, but one that does everything on paper isn't. That was an actual example from one site.

Also important, HIPPA is superceded by state law.  If a state has a public information act that requires release to the public of information that HIPAA would forbid, then the state law wins out. It sounds like HIPAA is more of an issue for reporters obtaining information as those bound by HIPAA won't release it now, rather than whether they can disseminate it.

Greg that's 2004.

Since then the gov't put out these very lucrative incentives for hospitals (and doctor's offices) to become more electronic. Along the way the laws changed to become more strict. Hackers entered the fray and there became laws about electronically protecting patient info and...2004 might as well be 1904. Alot has changed. Maybe most obvious is fax machines are illegal for medical establishments.

Every fine is 100k-250k. That hospital got a 500k fine. They have a week or ten days to report a HIPAA violation or pay a million dollar fine per incident. It didn't take them the 'months' to investigate and fire the employees. They knew and reported it within the deadline. Their lawyer probably had them wait to announce it to the world but 'no one' takes that extra fine and waits to report it.

Curiously absent in this is the other guy that was at the top of the printout Adam shared. That guy could be suing Adam left n right. He had no purposeful reason to share his info with the public.

Everything is federal. Could there be state fines? Sure. A state crime committed? Sure. But almost every patient info type law is federal. When a state inspector visits a hospital, it's even on there that this will be reported to the fed gov't. They want the fear of OMG I broke a federal law and will be prosecuted by 'the feds' and 'play the game' that way. 

Today this is more like we have spent billions protecting electronic patient info and firewalls and secure networks and encrypting data and you handed him a paper?

Let me pause for a sec and explain what Adam posted. It was a census- a list of who is in the hospital with a very brief summary of why they're there and vitals. This is A medical record, but in no way is it HIS medical record. That'll never go in "his chart" but be discarded once a new census is printed out. It's a rundown for doctors rounds- this guy is in this room, that guy in that room etc. That would be the first debate to happen-if this counts as his medical record.

There is a difference between a medical record and medical info. That would be called medical info. A medical record would have patient history and be in depth and anyone would absolutely get the vibe this is private and personal when looking at it.

When this happened, I was reminded that the NFL and teams don't have to release all medical info on players. I thought they did. Apparently there are things that happen during the offseason that are kept quiet with good reason. IIRC the article I read started with dental and mole removal and ended pointing out the Hodkins disease NFLers didn't announce they had it til they were retiring to get treatment while it's very likely they knew months before. 

Adam apologized. I think that says something there about guilt. If I'm not mistaken, ESPN did as well. 

Besides in the medical profession, I've worked as a reporter. There's lines you don't cross being given access to things, you're expected to have some decency. Covering my first death with a camera hanging around my neck was exciting, then sad, then why the do I even have a camera and....it's a quick learning experience to be a decent person. Adam was shady here and I think that was the gist of his apology. To me it read like "I know better, sorry" and he does. What I didn't understand was why he posted the pic. He should have just said 'xyz happened' and if his boss questioned his source(only one that can) then he could show the boss the pic.

I don't know of any laws he violated. As there has been an utter onslaught of new laws in this electronic age, it would be oh so easy to miss. 99% of them are about the medical establishment protecting the patient's info. Those hackers hacked an insurance company and there were new (and their partners, representatives, and subsidies) or amended laws written.

I guarantee Adam 'heard it' from a writer's association about being decent. But that's part of it here too. Adam seems like a good guy and that'll help him rather than some National Enquirer type reporter.

Outside of business, there are personal privacy laws which we never speak of. Recently people have been sued for posting naughty pics of ex's, financial documents of ex's etc. This is not something I know a lot about. That law isn't about specifics but sharing inherent assumed everyone would guess private items. Here is where I think Adam would have a prob, a personal lawsuit. 

I think JPPs lawyers are going to be able to say that Adam's report cost JPP tons of $. Adam's will say the injury was going to cost him $ whenever it came out, he was just the whistle-blower. This would just go in circles and about do nothing.

When you go back to the Giants sending people there but JPP not ready to talk to them. He wanted to discuss it with his family, doc, physical therapist etc first and come to his own conclusion before informing his employer. That should be his right. Adam did take that away from him. This is also why I think a personal lawsuit is the only way JPP gets $.

The Giants are class acts. They gave JPP franchise tag $ even after what happened. Adam is fortunate. Every angle of this costing him $ is destroyed here. ESPN or Adam only has to show franchise players that didn't have a big payday a year after getting tagged. You know there's even a slew of tagged players that got injured.

As long as this is about business, Adam seems totally safe to me. If JPP makes it personal, then he might have something. I'd have to know Florida's personal privacy laws and federal personal privacy laws more- it just seems like the only possible avenue for JPP here.