This just in: UCLA Med Center firing 13 for snooping in Britney Spears' records
They were warned and they didn't listen.
Within days of being told of the legal perils of snooping in to pop star Britney Spears' medical records, 13 employees of the UCLA Medical Center did just that, and are being fired. Six doctors also face disciplinary action, Charles Ornstein reports.
UCLA sent a memo warning staffers the morning Spears was hospitalized on Jan. 31 that they were not allowed to peruse records unless directly caring for a patient. Doing so is considered a violation of a federal patient privacy law called the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act, which went into effect in 2003.
The records reviewed by those who were fired were not from Spears’ most recent hospital stay, but rather from previous hospitalizations at UCLA, a source familiar with the matter said. Those disciplined include both medical and non-medical personnel, although no doctors were among those fired, the person said.
This isn't the first such incident. Workers caught sneaking a peek at her files after she gave birth to her first child in 2005 also were fired.
How they were caught, reaction from hospital brass -- full story here.
--Veronique de Turenne
Photo - GABRIEL BOUYS / AFP / Getty Images
so what
Posted by: Thomas | March 14, 2008 at 02:23 PM
I'd like to know how the medical center knew. Poorly written story not to tell us how they were caught.
Posted by: Lori | March 14, 2008 at 02:40 PM
glad to see UCLA is doing the right thing by firing people for breaking the law.
you said in your report that 6 UCLA physicians were disciplined. why did you not name them in your story? if the broke the law, they should be outed. simple. let the public know who those doctors are so we, the public, can stay away from docs like them.
a reader in LA
Posted by: a reader | March 14, 2008 at 02:42 PM
Good - fire them.
Problem then is, if ANY Doctor did the same thing, they MUST be fired also.
But we all know the next problem - any Doctor that 'looked' in on these files will be covered up - they will band together and say they were being asked for second opinions.
Reality is, business as usual - no Doctor will be fired.
Posted by: Fred | March 14, 2008 at 02:45 PM
Leave the girl alone for god sake - let her get back to doing what she does best - PERFORMING..... so she can provide for her KIDS and looser ex-husband who just used her for money and attached himself to her forever financially by convincing her to have his children. She WILL get custody back and PAY BACK is a b....
Posted by: free Spirit | March 14, 2008 at 02:47 PM
i'm sure they got paid lots of money from the paps for snooping. they probably figured the risk was worth it.
Posted by: Shauna | March 14, 2008 at 02:48 PM
so much about doctor patient confidentuality.
Posted by: apujac | March 14, 2008 at 02:49 PM
alot of medical people do it , as a form of entertainment . my issue is a double standard in the fact that why are there any docotors fired. it should be made a felony to do so and they should lose their license and be prosecuted. the concept of proffesional behavior is a joke these days. this has become a form of entertainment for the medical community.
peter
Posted by: peter | March 14, 2008 at 02:51 PM
good that they got fired.
theres plenty more where they came from.
Posted by: xaiver | March 14, 2008 at 02:53 PM
Lori -
The full story does have the details you're looking for - just click the link. The blog post is a web alert to tell you the basics.
Veronique
Posted by: Veronique | March 14, 2008 at 02:54 PM
Given that UCLA tracked the identity of the employees who snooped by their computer ids, they could institute firewalls to prevent these sort of intrusions from ever occurring. When a celebrity comes for treatment, their records can be tagged so as to only be accessible by the treating physician and a few assigned nurses, not every healthcare provider on staff. There can be extra steps involved too, like pop up windows that confirm by answer that the doctor/nurse as to why they looking at the celebrity's record (e.g. need to check blood type, etc.). If they don't have a specific reason, they too are blocked. This can ferret out the snoop pretty fast and prevent others from trying.
Posted by: Carmen Gonzalez | March 14, 2008 at 05:16 PM
HIPAA also requires hospitals to track incidents of disclosures of protected health information (i.e. the hospital must keep track of who looks at patient records). With ever advancing technology, the viewing as well as the tracking of such disclosures is probably complete electronically.
Posted by: vbjuls | March 18, 2008 at 06:00 AM
FIRE THE DOCTORS TOO....OR YOU SHOULD GET SUED
Posted by: LegalEagle | March 20, 2008 at 09:37 PM