quote:

Originally posted by SIGnified:

quote:

Originally posted by James in Denver:
From the PRE report, page 9:
During "DAD"'s early counseling at the age 13, he was diagnosed with tourette's syndrome, motor ticks and ADHD.
-----------------
From the PRE report, page 9:
"DAD" takes Wellbutrin and Effexor for depression or anxiety. He is not currently in counseling.
-----------------
From the PRE report, page 42:
"DAD"'s MCMI possible diagnosis were avoidant personality type, unspecified personality disorder melancholic, unspecified personality disorder masochistic and schizoid personality style.
-----------------
From the PRE report, page 42:
"Mom" had no indication of any major depression on Beck Depression inventory. On her MCMI, possible diagnosis were avoidant personality type and compulsive personality type.

James

Wow dude, how would you score?

This looks like a good subset of the normal population.

Also, I'm pretty certain HIPPA doesn't allow you to publish this kind of information.


You need some SSRIs too it seems.

The father's psychiatric and medical information should be immediately removed from the thread. Those filings are likely not part of the public record in the case, and their unauthorized publication may result in action by the court.

In addition, the OP's behavior (personally following the child's father for days on end) would also likely trigger drastic action by the family division judges I am familiar with. The OP should delete this thread and reconsider his behavior before it causes problems for his significant other.

I don't see what it could possibly gain you to post the father's psychological history in this thread. You're spending a lot of time and effort justifying behavior that pretty much everyone is trying to tell you to chill out on. Posting a potential HIPAA violation on the internet serves you not one whit, not even in the face of trying to justify your actions to your internet friends. Dad may or may not be nuts, but it would suck for you to wind up in difficulties over your actions thus far.

Far removed from being an expert in anything, but what you've been doing smells kinda stupid. You can be a good guy and still lose everything doing what you thought was the right thing. You can be of much more service to your family in a limited role that doesn't risk incarceration.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: P220 Smudge,

I'm not condoning the OPs behavior, but those who are claiming HIPPA violation...there's no name associated with the information...and I'm sure there are people here better versed than I am in this...but I'm not seeing an issue.

I deal with this kind of confidential information quite often.

If you think of PII - Personally Identifiable Information - the OP didn't disclose any PII that ties the info with anyone. It's a nameless disclosure.

quote:

Originally posted by SIGguy229:
I'm not condoning the OPs behavior, but those who are claiming HIPPA violation...there's no name associated with the information...and I'm sure there are people here better versed than I am in this...but I'm not seeing an issue.

HIPPA applies to covered entities only. The ex-wife's new boyfriend is not a covered entity. If there is a violation to trace back, the question would be how the ex-wife's new boyfriend came upon the information. But I doubt it was through an unauthorized release by a covered entity.

quote:

Originally posted by SIGguy229:
I'm not condoning the OPs behavior, but those who are claiming HIPPA violation...there's no name associated with the information...and I'm sure there are people here better versed than I am in this...but I'm not seeing an issue.

I am not condoning his actions, either, but this has nothing to do with HIPAA, even if he had named name. There might be other law that he might have violated, but HIPAA, he didn't. He is not a health care provider, or a health plan, or a business associate of such, as spelled out in HIPAA.

"Clusterfuck" and "train wreck" keep coming to mind.

quote:

Originally posted by DaBigBR:

quote:

Originally posted by SIGguy229:
I'm not condoning the OPs behavior, but those who are claiming HIPPA violation...there's no name associated with the information...and I'm sure there are people here better versed than I am in this...but I'm not seeing an issue.

HIPPA applies to covered entities only. The ex-wife's new boyfriend is not a covered entity. If there is a violation to trace back, the question would be how the ex-wife's new boyfriend came upon the information. But I doubt it was through an unauthorized release by a covered entity.

Right. He isn't covered by HIPPA. Further, he got the info in litigation, which is probably also clean.

quote:

Originally posted by P220 Smudge:
I'll take the point that isn't a HIPAA violation and simply re-state that I think posting the medical history of someone you've been stalking to bolster your argument in favor of stalking that person to your online friends may end up being a really bad idea. Any qualms with that?


Baby in the bath water, gents.

You see a single person on here condoning what he did?

After following the divorce threads and this one, I have a greater appreciation of being a bachelor at 35 years old.

No, that's why I deleted what I posted. Something about barking up trees...

quote:

Originally posted by 12131:

quote:

Originally posted by SIGguy229:
I'm not condoning the OPs behavior, but those who are claiming HIPPA violation...there's no name associated with the information...and I'm sure there are people here better versed than I am in this...but I'm not seeing an issue.

I am not condoning his actions, either, but this has nothing to do with HIPAA, even if he had named name. There might be other law that he might have violated, but HIPAA, he didn't. He is not a health care provider, or a health plan, or a business associate of such, as spelled out in HIPAA.

The psychiactric privilege issues in the case were likely addressed much earlier during the course of the child custody hearings. You are correct that HIPAA is not an issue at all.

My concern is that the OP may be disclosing the father's psychiatric information in violation of a protective order. Protective orders are common in a scenario where mental health records become evidence in child custody matters.

quote:

Originally posted by crue-dell:
After following the divorce threads and this one, I have a greater appreciation of being a bachelor at 35 years old.

Or satisfied that I've been happily married for 35 years!