Then pray tell - SM

Posted: Feb 21st, 2020 - 12:39 pm In Reply to: And my point was, there was NO - HIPAA violation

Why did you even bring up not liking the FB page when that was not the issue at hand? Is your wrist tired from all of that pot stirring?

Post A Reply Reply By Email Options

Use Rich Text Editor with Full Options CLOSE

Edit/Delete Message

Report this message

X CLOSE

Complete Discussion Below: (

marks the location of current message within thread)

Isn't posting a patient's name a HIPAA violation? - nm (Views: 632, 2020-02-20, 5:21 pm)
- Yes it is - MT67 (Views: 506, 2020-02-20, 5:24 pm)
  - I thought so, thanks! - nm (Views: 581, 2020-02-20, 5:28 pm)
- Sure is - SM (Views: 697, 2020-02-20, 6:27 pm)
  - Yes! That is exactly what I was referring to. I thought - maybe I have missed (Views: 711, 2020-02-20, 8:47 pm)
  - Maybe a couple of names were patients - Old Anon. SM (Views: 606, 2020-02-21, 6:46 am)
    - No one said they didn't like the page - The question was about HIPAA (Views: 420, 2020-02-21, 7:44 am)
      - And my point was, there was NO - HIPAA violation (Views: 601, 2020-02-21, 9:25 am)
        Then pray tell - SM
        Why would someone go to an MT FB page - and come here and (Views: 334, 2020-02-21, 3:21 pm)
        Because it does no good to complain to the admin - of the FB page, and... (Views: 300, 2020-02-21, 4:36 pm)
        LOL. Go Away? - Have I been suddenly (Views: 479, 2020-02-21, 5:32 pm)
        Not middle school but some of you sure seem to think you're - transported to a top management position SM (Views: 299, 2020-02-22, 9:23 am)
        Nobody has ordered you not to post. Just - saying how misguided (Views: 305, 2020-02-23, 8:05 am)
    - Yeah, all the first names were UNIQUE. That was - the point NM (Views: 437, 2020-02-21, 8:32 am)
      - There were a few unique first names which - spanned a number (Views: 764, 2020-02-21, 3:24 pm)
        Think of "what if" one of those unusual names were on here or - a friend/relative of theirs be here. SM (Views: 293, 2020-02-22, 11:59 am)
        I agree - It is a HIPAA violation. (Views: 271, 2020-02-23, 2:04 pm)