1. In my opinion, the decision should be left to the board to decide. However, as a health administrator, I would push for a fair and equal treatment regardless if an individual is an employee or board member. Whatever the decision will be in this scenario will set the tone for what Middleboro Community Hospital stands for. This decision will change our image in the community and it is up to us to decide if we want a positive or a negative one.
2. Anti-discrimination laws differ from state to state, if Webster hospital is in California that it unlawful for the employer to discriminate on the basis of smoking. California is one of the states that does not specifically protects smokers however, under broader state statue it prohibits employers to discriminate against any employee who is engaged in a lawful activity. OHA can ban smoking from the facility and designated areas but it can not control/invade its employee’s private life and what they do after work hours. This decision is also not ethnical because people should have the autonomy to live their lives as they please. If I was in leadership, I would not support this decision at all. I agree that smoking has harmful effects on health, and I am sure people who use these products know about the drawbacks. They are adults and we do not need to make lifestyle decisions for them. 3. Physician Care Services is a private organization therefore, state and federal drug testing laws loosely apply to them. In private employment case law, some states have ruled that employment-at-will doctrine trumps employees’ privacy rights. In California, private sector employees are protected by state constitution 22. It really depends on the state law. Even though, PCS is a private entity, complying with the state and federal laws is recommended just to be on safe legal ground. Testing without reason might get the employer in trouble, there needs to be a sound, work-related reason to require current employees to participate in drug testing. But, I am assuming drug testing of potential new hires is ok. Parents usually have control over health related information regarding their non-emancipated teen however, there are some stipulations. …show more content…
Exceptions include: substance abuse, pregnancy, STDs etc. HIPAA also protects the confidentiality for minors under some circumstances. In addition, it is important what the state law says about teen confidentiality. If a state allows the physician to disclose such information, then HIPAA allows the physician to do the same. If state loosely permits but does not mandate, then physician must follow HIPAA rules and practice discretion. If the state does not allow disclosure of such information, then physician needs minor’s permission to disclose. If there is no law in place, then the physician can disclose upon parent’s request. Therefore, once again it depends on the state law. 4. Issues to be considered: • Patient and staff safety • Potential law suits from infected patients and/or staff • Was the Doctor …show more content…
It seems like the news will definitely leak because the wife is suing Dr. Midmore. Even if the news does not leak, it is ethically and morally wrong to not do anything about the situation as patients’ and employees’ health is at risk. It is a life threatening disease if not taken care of properly. In this situation, I would approach the problem same way like the CEO by exploring the possible avenues we can take with the legal and medical
2. Anti-discrimination laws differ from state to state, if Webster hospital is in California that it unlawful for the employer to discriminate on the basis of smoking. California is one of the states that does not specifically protects smokers however, under broader state statue it prohibits employers to discriminate against any employee who is engaged in a lawful activity. OHA can ban smoking from the facility and designated areas but it can not control/invade its employee’s private life and what they do after work hours. This decision is also not ethnical because people should have the autonomy to live their lives as they please. If I was in leadership, I would not support this decision at all. I agree that smoking has harmful effects on health, and I am sure people who use these products know about the drawbacks. They are adults and we do not need to make lifestyle decisions for them. 3. Physician Care Services is a private organization therefore, state and federal drug testing laws loosely apply to them. In private employment case law, some states have ruled that employment-at-will doctrine trumps employees’ privacy rights. In California, private sector employees are protected by state constitution 22. It really depends on the state law. Even though, PCS is a private entity, complying with the state and federal laws is recommended just to be on safe legal ground. Testing without reason might get the employer in trouble, there needs to be a sound, work-related reason to require current employees to participate in drug testing. But, I am assuming drug testing of potential new hires is ok. Parents usually have control over health related information regarding their non-emancipated teen however, there are some stipulations. …show more content…
Exceptions include: substance abuse, pregnancy, STDs etc. HIPAA also protects the confidentiality for minors under some circumstances. In addition, it is important what the state law says about teen confidentiality. If a state allows the physician to disclose such information, then HIPAA allows the physician to do the same. If state loosely permits but does not mandate, then physician must follow HIPAA rules and practice discretion. If the state does not allow disclosure of such information, then physician needs minor’s permission to disclose. If there is no law in place, then the physician can disclose upon parent’s request. Therefore, once again it depends on the state law. 4. Issues to be considered: • Patient and staff safety • Potential law suits from infected patients and/or staff • Was the Doctor …show more content…
It seems like the news will definitely leak because the wife is suing Dr. Midmore. Even if the news does not leak, it is ethically and morally wrong to not do anything about the situation as patients’ and employees’ health is at risk. It is a life threatening disease if not taken care of properly. In this situation, I would approach the problem same way like the CEO by exploring the possible avenues we can take with the legal and medical