Brand New Blood Card meeting - Your Blood will run cold.

by hamsterbait 35 Replies latest jw friends

  • Jamelle

    I have attended several meetings recently regarding HIPAA and other legal basics that affect the hospital at which I work. The information I looked up makes me think that what the JWs are trying to do with that statement on the blood card will not really suceed. I sincerely hope I am right in feeling that way. The way the Society tries to tighten their hold on the rank and file is desipcable!

    Indiana state law is actually stricter than HIPAA, but for what it's worth, here are some things I thought were interesting...

    Disclosure of PHI - HIPAA and Indiana state law state that medical records may only be released pursuant to:

    1.) The patient's written authorization 2.) A subpoena coupled with a request for production of documents from a non-party 3.) A subpoena coupled with a patient's written authorization or 4.) A court order

    Sensitive Medical Records

    Certain types of medical records, such as those that reference mental health treatment, communicable diseases, including, without limitation, HIV, AIDS, or AIDS-related information, or the diagnosis or treatment of drug or alcohol abuse, are subject to special protection. If a patient's written consent requests generally any and all medical records and does not expressly authorize the release of mental health records or records that reference communicable diseases or the diagnosis or treatment of drug or alcohol abuse, such records should not be produced without a patient's revised consent containing express authorization for the release of such records, unless another exception for release of the records applies or a court order has been entered requiring release.

    Access to Records by or on Behalf of the Patient, Including Minor Patients

    In order to obtain such records, the patient must complete some sort of Request for Release of Medical Records Form or an alternative form that contains all of the Indiana required elements for release of medical record information. A patient's written consent for the release of a patient's general helath record must contain the following:

    1) The name and address of the patient 2.) The name of the person requested to release the patient's record 3.) The name of the person or provider to whom the patient's health record is to be released 4.) The purpose of the release 5.) A description of the information to be released from the health record 6.) The signature of the patient 7.) The date on which the document is signed 8.) A statement that the consent is suject to revocation at any time 9.) The date, event, or condition on which the consent will expire if not previously revoked and so on and son on...

    The request may be for either the entire medical record or the pertinent part of the medical record related to a specific condition. A patient's written request for medical records is valid for 60 days.

  • loosie

    Blood card = medical directive = patriot act

  • glitter

    JWs popped over and my frustratingly-teetering-on-leaving mother asked for a new blood card. THIS new blood card. I also learned in the conversation that her 8 years old card has someone other than me (as I was a minor 8 years ago) listed as emergency contact, which means if she got hit by a truck not only would I not be told about it until god knows when, some JW she hasn't seen in years, and a HLC she has never met at all would be agreeing to let her die in my absence.

    I freaked out when the JWs left and begged her not to carry the blood card, just to have me and my sister's numbers in her purse on an ID card and that we'd "do the right thing". She said she understood my point, and said she wouldn't carry it - but the JWs had said they'd come back with it when they are issued so I hope she doesn't change her mind. :s

    While the JWs were here, one of them, a bloke my age said "I don't even let my mum (JW) sign my blood card because I don't want her to panic in Casualty and agree to blood." how UNNATURAL is that, wanting to die if it came down to it and not wanting your mum to be able to do what she feels is best?

  • Ned

    The BIG NEWS is not just about the Molko case. It is about other cases including Reynolds (Mormon's bigamy case), the Catholic Church sex cases, the PTL case, etc. These cases all hold that religious "freedom" goes so far, and no more. It's about where the State should draw the line on what a religion does - between a religion's right to worship and the State's interest in harmony, preservation of life, etc. Only when the State has a compelling interest, such as saving lives (including its citizens & children [i.e. future citizen's]) will it step in to stop a religion. If the WTS quoted medical doctors who mostly agreed with the JW's position, this would not be an issue. The issue is whether the WTS can misquote medical doctor's lives, dupe their followers into a false medical security surrounding those lies, and "get away with it"...when the lies "contribute" to deaths, comas, organ failure, etc.

  • skeeter1

    I've been away on vacation for this past Run cold doesn't cut it. Try my blood runs like ice.

  • greendawn

    Ah the complications of being involved in a pea brained cult, so much hairsplitting about blood fractions and components and then invasions of the individuals privacy.

    They can't see the obvious that blood donations don't kill or harm anyone but save lives.

Share this