638
Antivax mom is a lying liar.
(lemmy.world)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 11 Sep 2024
638 points (97.3% liked)
InsanePeopleFacebook
2525 readers
258 users here now
Screenshots of people being insane on Facebook. Please censor names/pics of end users in screenshots. Please follow the rules of lemmy.world
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
Really pushing HIPAA with this one, but with good cause
Yeah the sticker sentence especially. That's essentially the same as saying that the kid got the shot. HIPAA doesn't say "it's ok to reveal private health information as long as you do it in a wink-wink manner." Revealing personally identifiable health information is forbidden no matter how you do it.
Even agreeing that her son was at the doctor was a violation. We can't confirm or deny that a potential patient even came to the building for health care.
They could probably get away with simply saying “I would never recommend any advice that goes against verified safe medical practices.”
I think she's good with "I absolutely did not say that".
I suspect this is a double reverse "and everybody clapped" moment.
See now, I decided I could read that as "your son deserved a bravery sticker for having to bear up with you as a mom."
Since the mom made the visit itself public, and lied about the conversation, and the nurse didn't specify what either person DID say, nor what actually was or wasn't done, I'm not sure any new information was revealed. Implied, if you want to infer it, but not stated. And for the mom to sue about it, she'd have to publicly admit to her own lies....
There is no law against lying.
I hopethis helps.
I know lying isn't against the law. (Although I'm neither a legal nor medical professional.) I meant she would be deterred from suing because the extent of her lies would have to be aired in court, in public, in order to prove the nurse revealed information.
In the case you linked, the nurse posted information about a rare case (ergo easily identified) whereas in OP's situation the publicly identifying information had already been revealed by the mother and the nurse didn't specify any new facts about the case itself. She might still get in trouble but it's less cut and dried than the case in your link. Imvho.
Psst...the responder isn't really the nurse from the story. It's someone pretending to be the nurse and blurring names so that they can rile you up.
I would certainly hope so, for everyone's sake.