05-24-2006, 06:42 AM
FranxicoMay 23 2006, 08:35 PM Ceorana OK, suppose the person without a legal guardian goes into a permanent vegetative state, aka alive but not going anywhere, and had a will not wanting euthanasia, in the same situation. There's no denying that they're still a patient.[/quote]
The court appoints a legal guardian. Happens all the time.
[/quote]
OK, that makes sense I guess.
Quote: Ceorana Or suppose some lawyers want to prove that the alleged victim of a crime was in a hospital at the time they alleged they were assaulted somewhere else? No way to get the records.[/quote]
The fact that a person is or is not/was or was not admitted to a facility at a given time is not a "Personal medical record". Hospitals in RL can release that information at their own discretion, over the phone in fact. I don't think that's even covered by the RL Privacy Act.[/quote]
You are missing the point. Suppose a plaintiff sues for assault with a stick in a hospital, but defense would like to say that the plaintiff was suffering from a condition that would have made him die instantly if hit with a stick. Or a plaintiff sues for damages relating to a person hitting him with a stick, but defense wants to prove tha the plaintiff had medical problems that caused the damage. Whatever. The point is that our legal system isn't comfortable ruling some of the solutions, and some are outright against the proposal. Why weren't exceptions included in the proposal?
The court appoints a legal guardian. Happens all the time.
[/quote]
OK, that makes sense I guess.
Quote: Ceorana Or suppose some lawyers want to prove that the alleged victim of a crime was in a hospital at the time they alleged they were assaulted somewhere else? No way to get the records.[/quote]
The fact that a person is or is not/was or was not admitted to a facility at a given time is not a "Personal medical record". Hospitals in RL can release that information at their own discretion, over the phone in fact. I don't think that's even covered by the RL Privacy Act.[/quote]
You are missing the point. Suppose a plaintiff sues for assault with a stick in a hospital, but defense would like to say that the plaintiff was suffering from a condition that would have made him die instantly if hit with a stick. Or a plaintiff sues for damages relating to a person hitting him with a stick, but defense wants to prove tha the plaintiff had medical problems that caused the damage. Whatever. The point is that our legal system isn't comfortable ruling some of the solutions, and some are outright against the proposal. Why weren't exceptions included in the proposal?