Roe v Wade

stuckinline · July 2022

static111 said:

Ohio AG a real piece of work

https://www.news5cleveland.com/news/state/man-arrested-for-raping-10-year-old-girl-from-ohio-who-reportedly-went-to-indiana-for-abortion

News 5 spoke with Yost later in the day. We pointed out that some have called for the attorney general to apologize and asked him if that was something he was prepared to do.
He said, “Apologize for what? Questioning a newspaper story?”
We said that some saw it as passing doubt on this girl’s story and her experiences.
“Remember, on Monday night we didn’t know that the girl even existed,” Yost said. “The doctor who inappropriately shot off her mouth to the press about a patient for political gain wouldn’t talk at all."

Would HIPPA apply in this case?

What Information is Protected

Protected Health Information. The Privacy Rule protects all "individually identifiable health information" held or transmitted by a covered entity or its business associate, in any form or media, whether electronic, paper, or oral. The Privacy Rule calls this information "protected health information (PHI)."12

https://www.hhs.gov/hipaa/for-professionals/privacy/laws-regulations/index.html#:~:text=The Privacy Rule protects all,health information (PHI)."

Halifax2TheMax · July 2022

stuckinline said:

static111 said:

Ohio AG a real piece of work

https://www.news5cleveland.com/news/state/man-arrested-for-raping-10-year-old-girl-from-ohio-who-reportedly-went-to-indiana-for-abortion

News 5 spoke with Yost later in the day. We pointed out that some have called for the attorney general to apologize and asked him if that was something he was prepared to do.
He said, “Apologize for what? Questioning a newspaper story?”
We said that some saw it as passing doubt on this girl’s story and her experiences.
“Remember, on Monday night we didn’t know that the girl even existed,” Yost said. “The doctor who inappropriately shot off her mouth to the press about a patient for political gain wouldn’t talk at all."

Would HIPPA apply in this case?
What Information is Protected
Protected Health Information. The Privacy Rule protects all "individually identifiable health information" held or transmitted by a covered entity or its business associate, in any form or media, whether electronic, paper, or oral. The Privacy Rule calls this information "protected health information (PHI)."12
https://www.hhs.gov/hipaa/for-professionals/privacy/laws-regulations/index.html#:~:text=The Privacy Rule protects all,health information (PHI)."

Not sure what you're asking here. HIPPA protects health information and the identity of the individual. I'm not sure what the doctor or whomever spoke to the press but to say something like, "we had a 10 year old patient who was raped and impregnated and subsequently had to travel across state lines to obtain an abortion," would not be a violation of HIPPA. Disclosing their name, address, social security number, parents' names or address or anything else that might identify them would be a violation of HIPPA. Medical personnel are allowed to speak in generalities. Key qualifier is "individually" before "identifiable health information."

stuckinline · July 2022

Halifax2TheMax said:

stuckinline said:

static111 said:

Ohio AG a real piece of work

https://www.news5cleveland.com/news/state/man-arrested-for-raping-10-year-old-girl-from-ohio-who-reportedly-went-to-indiana-for-abortion

News 5 spoke with Yost later in the day. We pointed out that some have called for the attorney general to apologize and asked him if that was something he was prepared to do.
He said, “Apologize for what? Questioning a newspaper story?”
We said that some saw it as passing doubt on this girl’s story and her experiences.
“Remember, on Monday night we didn’t know that the girl even existed,” Yost said. “The doctor who inappropriately shot off her mouth to the press about a patient for political gain wouldn’t talk at all."

Would HIPPA apply in this case?
What Information is Protected
Protected Health Information. The Privacy Rule protects all "individually identifiable health information" held or transmitted by a covered entity or its business associate, in any form or media, whether electronic, paper, or oral. The Privacy Rule calls this information "protected health information (PHI)."12
https://www.hhs.gov/hipaa/for-professionals/privacy/laws-regulations/index.html#:~:text=The Privacy Rule protects all,health information (PHI)."

Not sure what you're asking here. HIPPA protects health information and the identity of the individual. I'm not sure what the doctor or whomever spoke to the press but to say something like, "we had a 10 year old patient who was raped and impregnated and subsequently had to travel across state lines to obtain an abortion," would not be a violation of HIPPA. Disclosing their name, address, social security number, parents' names or address or anything else that might identify them would be a violation of HIPPA. Medical personnel are allowed to speak in generalities. Key qualifier is "individually" before "identifiable health information."

Ok, thanks. My question was to ask if HIPPA would prevent the doctor from disclosing the 10-year-old's name or any details about the girl's healthcare.

“Remember, on Monday night we didn’t know that the girl even existed,” Yost said. “The doctor who inappropriately shot off her mouth to the press about a patient for political gain wouldn’t talk at all."

dankind · July 2022

stuckinline said:

Halifax2TheMax said:

stuckinline said:

static111 said:

Ohio AG a real piece of work

https://www.news5cleveland.com/news/state/man-arrested-for-raping-10-year-old-girl-from-ohio-who-reportedly-went-to-indiana-for-abortion

News 5 spoke with Yost later in the day. We pointed out that some have called for the attorney general to apologize and asked him if that was something he was prepared to do.
He said, “Apologize for what? Questioning a newspaper story?”
We said that some saw it as passing doubt on this girl’s story and her experiences.
“Remember, on Monday night we didn’t know that the girl even existed,” Yost said. “The doctor who inappropriately shot off her mouth to the press about a patient for political gain wouldn’t talk at all."

Would HIPPA apply in this case?
What Information is Protected
Protected Health Information. The Privacy Rule protects all "individually identifiable health information" held or transmitted by a covered entity or its business associate, in any form or media, whether electronic, paper, or oral. The Privacy Rule calls this information "protected health information (PHI)."12
https://www.hhs.gov/hipaa/for-professionals/privacy/laws-regulations/index.html#:~:text=The Privacy Rule protects all,health information (PHI)."

Not sure what you're asking here. HIPPA protects health information and the identity of the individual. I'm not sure what the doctor or whomever spoke to the press but to say something like, "we had a 10 year old patient who was raped and impregnated and subsequently had to travel across state lines to obtain an abortion," would not be a violation of HIPPA. Disclosing their name, address, social security number, parents' names or address or anything else that might identify them would be a violation of HIPPA. Medical personnel are allowed to speak in generalities. Key qualifier is "individually" before "identifiable health information."

Ok, thanks. My question was to ask if HIPPA would prevent the doctor from disclosing the 10-year-old's name or any details about the girl's healthcare.

“Remember, on Monday night we didn’t know that the girl even existed,” Yost said. “The doctor who inappropriately shot off her mouth to the press about a patient for political gain wouldn’t talk at all."

In that case, unless there is a large swath of impregnated-by-rape 10-year-olds leaving Ohio so that they can get an abortion in Indiana, I'd say that the doctor in this case revealed some pretty "individually identifiable health information."

But, hey, at least she got the story in the papers, right? Good on her?

mrussel1 · July 2022

dankind said:

stuckinline said:

Halifax2TheMax said:

stuckinline said:

static111 said:

Ohio AG a real piece of work

https://www.news5cleveland.com/news/state/man-arrested-for-raping-10-year-old-girl-from-ohio-who-reportedly-went-to-indiana-for-abortion

News 5 spoke with Yost later in the day. We pointed out that some have called for the attorney general to apologize and asked him if that was something he was prepared to do.
He said, “Apologize for what? Questioning a newspaper story?”
We said that some saw it as passing doubt on this girl’s story and her experiences.
“Remember, on Monday night we didn’t know that the girl even existed,” Yost said. “The doctor who inappropriately shot off her mouth to the press about a patient for political gain wouldn’t talk at all."

Would HIPPA apply in this case?
What Information is Protected
Protected Health Information. The Privacy Rule protects all "individually identifiable health information" held or transmitted by a covered entity or its business associate, in any form or media, whether electronic, paper, or oral. The Privacy Rule calls this information "protected health information (PHI)."12
https://www.hhs.gov/hipaa/for-professionals/privacy/laws-regulations/index.html#:~:text=The Privacy Rule protects all,health information (PHI)."

Not sure what you're asking here. HIPPA protects health information and the identity of the individual. I'm not sure what the doctor or whomever spoke to the press but to say something like, "we had a 10 year old patient who was raped and impregnated and subsequently had to travel across state lines to obtain an abortion," would not be a violation of HIPPA. Disclosing their name, address, social security number, parents' names or address or anything else that might identify them would be a violation of HIPPA. Medical personnel are allowed to speak in generalities. Key qualifier is "individually" before "identifiable health information."

Ok, thanks. My question was to ask if HIPPA would prevent the doctor from disclosing the 10-year-old's name or any details about the girl's healthcare.

“Remember, on Monday night we didn’t know that the girl even existed,” Yost said. “The doctor who inappropriately shot off her mouth to the press about a patient for political gain wouldn’t talk at all."

In that case, unless there is a large swath of impregnated-by-rape 10-year-olds leaving Ohio so that they can get an abortion in Indiana, I'd say that the doctor in this case revealed some pretty "individually identifiable health information."

But, hey, at least she got the story in the papers, right? Good on her?

You're goddam right, good on her. The girl hasn't been identified so her privacy remains and we know the risks of draconian Ohio law. You have a problem with this?

mace1229 · July 2022

dankind said:

stuckinline said:

Halifax2TheMax said:

stuckinline said:

static111 said:

Ohio AG a real piece of work

https://www.news5cleveland.com/news/state/man-arrested-for-raping-10-year-old-girl-from-ohio-who-reportedly-went-to-indiana-for-abortion

News 5 spoke with Yost later in the day. We pointed out that some have called for the attorney general to apologize and asked him if that was something he was prepared to do.
He said, “Apologize for what? Questioning a newspaper story?”
We said that some saw it as passing doubt on this girl’s story and her experiences.
“Remember, on Monday night we didn’t know that the girl even existed,” Yost said. “The doctor who inappropriately shot off her mouth to the press about a patient for political gain wouldn’t talk at all."

Would HIPPA apply in this case?
What Information is Protected
Protected Health Information. The Privacy Rule protects all "individually identifiable health information" held or transmitted by a covered entity or its business associate, in any form or media, whether electronic, paper, or oral. The Privacy Rule calls this information "protected health information (PHI)."12
https://www.hhs.gov/hipaa/for-professionals/privacy/laws-regulations/index.html#:~:text=The Privacy Rule protects all,health information (PHI)."

Not sure what you're asking here. HIPPA protects health information and the identity of the individual. I'm not sure what the doctor or whomever spoke to the press but to say something like, "we had a 10 year old patient who was raped and impregnated and subsequently had to travel across state lines to obtain an abortion," would not be a violation of HIPPA. Disclosing their name, address, social security number, parents' names or address or anything else that might identify them would be a violation of HIPPA. Medical personnel are allowed to speak in generalities. Key qualifier is "individually" before "identifiable health information."

Ok, thanks. My question was to ask if HIPPA would prevent the doctor from disclosing the 10-year-old's name or any details about the girl's healthcare.

“Remember, on Monday night we didn’t know that the girl even existed,” Yost said. “The doctor who inappropriately shot off her mouth to the press about a patient for political gain wouldn’t talk at all."

In that case, unless there is a large swath of impregnated-by-rape 10-year-olds leaving Ohio so that they can get an abortion in Indiana, I'd say that the doctor in this case revealed some pretty "individually identifiable health information."

But, hey, at least she got the story in the papers, right? Good on her?

No one even seemed to know what city or county this was from, so I don’t see that as being identifiable.
Insee your point, but I don’t think it applies here. It more applies to those work emails we’d get every couple weeks of “Joe will be out of the office for 2 weeks. Please send all work emails to Sally.” Followed by another email that read “There has been a positive case in the building, that person is being quarantined for 2 weeks. Due to privacy, we cannot disclose who that was, but we will notify you if you had known close contact.”

dankind · July 2022

Also, it's HIPAA, not HIPPA.

mickeyrat · July 2022

https://youtu.be/P8HRlEPK7SQ

mickeyrat · July 2022

https://apnews.com/article/abortion-health-congress-government-and-politics-fc8c68d1c4dd29ef0a364050013b8cf4

Abortion Government and politics Congress

AP-NORC poll: Majority want Congress to keep abortion legal

By HANNAH FINGERHUT

Today

WASHINGTON (AP) — A majority of Americans say Congress should pass a law guaranteeing access to legal abortion nationwide, according to a new poll that finds over half say they feel at least somewhat “sad” or “angry” about the Supreme Court’s decision to overturn Roe v. Wade.

The high court’s decision asserted that abortion is not a constitutional right and handed states the authority to severely restrict or ban abortion. The Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research poll shows many Americans back some restrictions on abortion, especially after the first trimester, but the most extreme measures introduced in some Republican-led states are at odds with the public — and with many of the people who live in them.

Faith Murphy, a 41-year-old in Coshocton, Ohio, said she was “quite upset” that the court overruled Roe and wants to see abortion access federally protected. While she's voted across the aisle, Murphy considers herself a Republican and doesn't want to see Republican leaders in her state and others push for restrictions.

“I don’t trust who we have in government here in Ohio ... to keep women’s rights or the right to an abortion for any reason whatsoever intact,” Murphy said.

Polling ahead of the June 24 decision suggested that overturning Roe would be unpopular with a majority of Americans who wanted to see the court uphold the 50-year precedent. The new poll, roughly three weeks after the decision, finds 53% of U.S. adults say they disapprove of the court’s decision, while 30% say they approve. An additional 16% say they neither approve nor disapprove.

Sixty percent think Congress should pass a law guaranteeing access to legal abortion nationwide. The House last Friday voted to restore abortion rights in the U.S., though the bill will likely stall in the Senate.

Overwhelming majorities also think their state should generally allow abortion in specific cases, including if the health of the pregnant person is endangered or if the pregnancy is the result of rape or incest. Few think abortion should always be illegal, and most Americans support their state generally allowing abortion six weeks into the pregnancy.

Those patterns persist even in the 23 states in which laws banning or tightening access to abortion have taken effect, will soon take effect or are being debated in court.

Blake Jones thinks six weeks “is far too early to be able to make a decision like that,” and while he personally doesn’t approve of abortion, the 28-year-old Democrat in Athens, Georgia, said he's pro-choice because he doesn’t believe “that my views should affect other people.”

Jones said he thinks the point of viability is more appropriate for restrictions on abortion, but even then, there should be exceptions if the pregnant person’s health is at risk or the baby would be born with a severe health issue.

Views about abortion at the 15-week mark are muddled. The poll shows Americans in states that have deepened restrictions on abortion are closely divided over abortion at 15 weeks into a pregnancy. That compares with about 6 in 10 Americans in other states saying abortion should be allowed at that point. That gap is similar on allowing abortion for “any reason."

Support dwindles across the board at 24 weeks into the pregnancy, with only about a third saying their state should generally allow for that.

While only about a third approve of the Supreme Court's decision, the poll finds about half of Americans think states should be responsible for establishing abortion laws.

Jeffrey Bouchelle agreed with the court because “it should’ve been a states’ rights issue in the first place.” The 57-year-old Republican in Farmers Branch, Texas, believes abortion is wrong, but as a state issue. Bouchelle accepted some states may allow abortion if that’s what the majority prefers.

“There should be access to abortion,” he said. “I just don’t think it should be in Texas.”

Overall, about a third of U.S. adults say they feel at least somewhat proud, relieved or excited about the court’s decision, a reflection that the decades-long effort to overturn Roe resonates with a sizable segment of the population.

“I’m happy with it,” Tammy Rardain said about the court’s decision. The 54-year-old Republican in Logan, Ohio, said her views on abortion are defined by her Christian faith. She wants to see a ban on abortion in Ohio at any point in the pregnancy.

More Americans — 55% — say they feel at least somewhat angry or sad about the decision, including about 4 in 10 who feel so strongly. Half say they feel at least somewhat anxious or hopeless — a sign that Democrats may struggle to turn feelings of anger into motivation to turn out to vote in this year’s midterm elections.

“I was really disappointed, and I felt as though our judicial system had failed us all,” said 41-year-old Democrat Candice Lampkin. “I truly believe that they’re infringing upon our civil rights and liberties.”

The Chicago resident said she wants abortion to be a federally protected right and is concerned about what health care, like birth control, might be targeted next. She hopes the issue will be top of mind for voters this fall.

“We have to do more during election season and make sure we hold our politicians accountable," she said.

___

The poll of 1,085 adults was conducted July 14-17 using a sample drawn from NORC’s probability-based AmeriSpeak Panel, which is designed to be representative of the U.S. population. The margin of sampling error for all respondents is plus or minus 3.9 percentage points.

Bentleyspop · July 2022

She gets it..

https://twitter.com/JessicaValenti/status/1552651038187933698?t=hRohDD7N5ZhIBJb8HaKkOQ&s=19

HughFreakingDillon · July 2022

get this piece of garbage religious activist judge off the bench.

https://www.cnn.com/2022/07/28/politics/samuel-alito-religious-liberty-notre-dame-rome/index.html

static111 · July 2022

HughFreakingDillon said:

get this piece of garbage religious activist judge off the bench.

https://www.cnn.com/2022/07/28/politics/samuel-alito-religious-liberty-notre-dame-rome/index.html

Key remark not in the article but from the speech

Alito continued. “All I’m going to say is that, ultimately, if we are going to win the battle to protect religious freedom in an increasingly secular society, we will need more than positive law.”

WTF does that mean!?

Halifax2TheMax · July 2022

static111 said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

get this piece of garbage religious activist judge off the bench.

https://www.cnn.com/2022/07/28/politics/samuel-alito-religious-liberty-notre-dame-rome/index.html

Key remark not in the article but from the speech

Alito continued. “All I’m going to say is that, ultimately, if we are going to win the battle to protect religious freedom in an increasingly secular society, we will need more than positive law.”

WTF does that mean!?

State mandated, sanctioned and enforced religion in all aspects of public life.

brianlux · July 2022

Halifax2TheMax said:

static111 said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

get this piece of garbage religious activist judge off the bench.

https://www.cnn.com/2022/07/28/politics/samuel-alito-religious-liberty-notre-dame-rome/index.html

Key remark not in the article but from the speech

Alito continued. “All I’m going to say is that, ultimately, if we are going to win the battle to protect religious freedom in an increasingly secular society, we will need more than positive law.”

WTF does that mean!?

State mandated, sanctioned and enforced religion in all aspects of public life.

Good grief, it's like we're heading back into the dark ages!

cincybearcat · July 2022

Halifax2TheMax said:

static111 said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

get this piece of garbage religious activist judge off the bench.

https://www.cnn.com/2022/07/28/politics/samuel-alito-religious-liberty-notre-dame-rome/index.html

Key remark not in the article but from the speech

Alito continued. “All I’m going to say is that, ultimately, if we are going to win the battle to protect religious freedom in an increasingly secular society, we will need more than positive law.”

WTF does that mean!?

State mandated, sanctioned and enforced religion in all aspects of public life.

Super weird that “religious freedom” means making everyone follow 1 religion. Fuck those people.

Lerxst1992 · August 2022

Is Kansas really going to vote down the potential of an abortion ban? That’d be a pretty big story. And turnout for a primary there is off the charts.

mrussel1 · August 2022

Lerxst1992 said:

Is Kansas really going to vote down the potential of an abortion ban? That’d be a pretty big story. And turnout for a primary there is off the charts.

It's already called, 61-37%. It wasn't even close.

Cropduster-80 · August 2022

mrussel1 said:

Lerxst1992 said:

Is Kansas really going to vote down the potential of an abortion ban? That’d be a pretty big story. And turnout for a primary there is off the charts.

It's already called, 61-37%. It wasn't even close.

In a vacuum republicans seem to be pretty pro choice (or at least very divided), when it’s a single issue they get to vote on. The party will take note and stop letting people vote on it. Those same people will vote for pro life politicians because they are fellow republicans. Then they will just pass laws instead

that’s probably the lesson from Kansas. The Republican voters didn’t have to vote for a democrat on this, which they won’t do. they just had to vote on the issue

mrussel1 · August 2022

Cropduster-80 said:

mrussel1 said:

Lerxst1992 said:

Is Kansas really going to vote down the potential of an abortion ban? That’d be a pretty big story. And turnout for a primary there is off the charts.

It's already called, 61-37%. It wasn't even close.

In a vacuum republicans seem to be pretty pro choice when it’s a single issue they get to vote on. The party will take note and stop letting people vote on it. Those same people will vote for pro life politicians because they are fellow republicans. Then they will just pass laws instead

that’s probably the lesson from Kansas

I see the lesson as Evangelicals have an outsized influence on the party and the D's will be committing political malpractice if they don't somehow make it the most important issue in November.

If gas gets down to under $3, I think that can happen.

I think there is some sort of state Constitution protection they were trying to remove, that's why it was on the ballot. I think FL has a similar issue, so abortion cannot be outright banned.

Cropduster-80 · August 2022

mrussel1 said:

Cropduster-80 said:

mrussel1 said:

Lerxst1992 said:

Is Kansas really going to vote down the potential of an abortion ban? That’d be a pretty big story. And turnout for a primary there is off the charts.

It's already called, 61-37%. It wasn't even close.

In a vacuum republicans seem to be pretty pro choice when it’s a single issue they get to vote on. The party will take note and stop letting people vote on it. Those same people will vote for pro life politicians because they are fellow republicans. Then they will just pass laws instead

that’s probably the lesson from Kansas

I see the lesson as Evangelicals have an outsized influence on the party and the D's will be committing political malpractice if they don't somehow make it the most important issue in November.

If gas gets down to under $3, I think that can happen.

I think there is some sort of state Constitution protection they were trying to remove, that's why it was on the ballot. I think FL has a similar issue, so abortion cannot be outright banned.

Yeah. Reproductive rights is in the state constitution. They were trying to amend it so I believe that requires a vote

I can’t see any other states going with a ballot initiative on this by choice. Pro choice wins every time

Roe v Wade

Comments

Categories