Add a Comment

Comment by Marie on June 11, 2008 at 2:52pm

oh ok, good to know...... our dept didnt exactly esplain things too well in the no photos lecture, so thanks for the info :) .......... i think its mostly because a neighboring agency had many an issue with ffs taking cell phone pics of "cool patients" to show off to people so my agency took the scare tactic method to nip it in the butt...................

Comment by Stephen Walsh on June 11, 2008 at 2:34pm

If the incident is considered on public property and at a news event that the public has the right to be informed, you may photograph any and all subjects. That freedom end when the patient is put into an ambulance or is in the hospital. In these cases the person has a reasonbale right to privacy. At an accident scene or fire scene, any subject can be photographed and this is where personal and moral ethics come into play. A deceased person is not newsworthy but a rescue is photographically. So in otherwords, anyone can be photographed in a public emergency and it does not violate HIPPA. A photograph does not diagnose nor reveal any personal health information or history. If in the caption a photographer states "this person has a history of seizures and should not have been driving, yes that is a HIPPA violation.

Comment by Marie on June 11, 2008 at 2:03pm

"Although patient photography may be fairly common, liability issues need to be considered and federal regulations observed.

Without proper precautions during a healthcare encounter, patient photography may make a healthcare provider liable for invasion of privacy. Courts have imposed liability primarily when the provider has exploited the patient for commercial benefit. However, courts have also imposed liability when the patient’s name or likeness was used for non-commercial purposes, finding that even taking a picture without the patient’s expressed consent was an invasion of privacy.1"


""Health information means any information, whether oral or recorded in any form or medium, that:

(1) Is created or received by a health care provider, health plan, public health authority, employer, life insurer, school or university, or healthcare clearinghouse; and

(2) Relates to the past, present, or future physical or mental health or condition of an individual; the provision of health care to an individual; or the past, present, or future payment for the provision of healthcare to an individual."

According to Section 164.514(b)(2), Implementation Specifications: Requirements for Deindentification of Protected Health Information, photographic and comparable images are explicitly noted as an item to be removed during de-identification in order for records to avoid the protected health information status and fall outside the regulations:
"A covered entity may determine that health information is not individually identifiable health information only if:

(2)(i) the following identifiers of the individual or of relatives, employers, or household members of the individual, are removed:

(Q) full face photographic images and any comparable images"



that per the american health information management association



I guess my question just for understanding is, do FF's lose the right to privacy of photos with identifying characteristics not being allowed to be published even when that FF becomes a Patient?

I know that on the LE side of thing the second you step into uniform you lose any right to not be photographed etc, however, i'd assume that your status as a patient would supercede your status as a public servant as far as privacy is concerned...............

Comment by Stephen Walsh on June 11, 2008 at 2:00pm

if you are ON DUTY as a first responder then yes HIPPA applies as you are a caregiver. If you are shooting as a private citizen or for a news gathering agency then HIPPA does not apply.

Comment by Marie on June 11, 2008 at 1:47pm

hrm, interesting.... we were told absolutely no photos with anything that i said above due to hippa......... i'll have to check into it just from a gaining personal knowledge of whats actually accurate standpoint......... my dept overdoes things sometimes as far as caution goes, so maybe they just figured that stating that it was a hippa vio would help enforce their rule...........

Comment by Stephen Walsh on June 10, 2008 at 11:15pm

No because it is an incident that happened in a public incident. HIPPA only covers confidential information. This is a Firefighter who was injured at a fire. It is covered under Public Right to Know and Public Information Acts

Comment by Marie on June 10, 2008 at 11:12pm

not tryin to be a royal pain in teh butt.... but isn't this a hippa vio? i was told we cant have any photos where you can identify the pt either by visible face, tatoos, scars, etc....