# TV show Paramedics



## Chimpie (Feb 19, 2005)

What station is it on?  Discovery?  A&E?


----------



## Chimpie (Feb 19, 2005)

Never mind.  I found it.  Discovery Health Channel.  It's on at 1am out here.  I'll still be in bed though.  LOL


----------



## Wingnut (Feb 19, 2005)

I was wondering what happened to that show, I miss it.


----------



## TTLWHKR (Feb 19, 2005)

HIPAA happened to the chance of any new episodes.. Plus they said the medics were often unprofessional, didn't follow protocols, and made too many mistakes.. It was decided not to make any new episodes in the near future.

-from TLC website last year


----------



## Wingnut (Feb 20, 2005)

Well what's the difference between The paramedic show & COPS? (I love that one too) They blur out the faces on a lot of the arrests. I'm sure they could have made it more professional if there were problems.



That sucks


----------



## ffemt8978 (Feb 20, 2005)

> _Originally posted by Wingnut_@Feb 19 2005, 10:10 PM
> * Well what's the difference between The paramedic show & COPS? (I love that one too) They blur out the faces on a lot of the arrests. I'm sure they could have made it more professional if there were problems.
> 
> 
> ...


 Because what COPS do is a matter of public record.  You as the average citizen have the right to know who was arrested by the police and for what charge.

HIPAA throws a huge monkey wrench in this because if you give out any, and I mean any, information about a patient that does not conform to HIPAA you are looking at some hefty fines and possibly jail time.

For example, our district's lawyer has told us that we are not allowed under HIPAA to provide law enforcement a statement (written or verbal) about what we observe at the scene of an MVA.  It doesn't matter that the information can be observed and told to the cop by any Joe Citizen driving by the accident.  Our lawyer said that since we were called to the scene to provide patient care, we are bound by HIPAA for EVERYTHING we observe on scene.


----------



## Wingnut (Feb 20, 2005)

Ahhhhhhhhhh...

Still sucks, but makes sense.


----------



## ffemt8978 (Feb 20, 2005)

> _Originally posted by Wingnut_@Feb 19 2005, 10:57 PM
> * Ahhhhhhhhhh...
> 
> Still sucks, but makes sense. *


 Aint' that the truth.  I really enjoyed Paramedics, but now I've seen every episode at least six times.


----------



## Phridae (Feb 20, 2005)

I used to watch that show religiously.

I can never find it anymore. They replaced it on DHC at 6central with Trauma: Life in the ER. Which is okay too. But I've seen all those too.

Yep. Stupid HIPAA.


----------



## TTLWHKR (Feb 20, 2005)

It's on Discovery Health Saturday into Sunday 4am-6am. I think it may be on Sunday into Monday also. Allow me to pull up my trusty online satalite guide...

Other episodes..

Sun. Feb 27 4am-5am Paramedics: Critical Care

Sun. Feb 27 5am-6am Paramedics: Silicon Valley Saviors

Mon. Feb 28 6pm-7pm Paramedics: A Sinister Turn

Tue. Mar 01 3am-4am Paramedics: A Sinister Turn

Tue. Mar 01 6pm-7pm Paramedics: Air Care


----------



## rescuecpt (Feb 20, 2005)

> _Originally posted by ffemt8978_@Feb 20 2005, 12:42 AM
> * For example, our district's lawyer has told us that we are not allowed under HIPAA to provide law enforcement a statement (written or verbal) about what we observe at the scene of an MVA.  It doesn't matter that the information can be observed and told to the cop by any Joe Citizen driving by the accident.  Our lawyer said that since we were called to the scene to provide patient care, we are bound by HIPAA for EVERYTHING we observe on scene. *


 There are so many different interpretations - our district lawyer said we must answer the officers questions as long as we remain truthful and don't talk about so-and-so's medical history, but about the pt's actions and behavior upon our arrival and during our treatment.


----------



## ffemt8978 (Feb 20, 2005)

> _Originally posted by rescuecpt+Feb 20 2005, 09:00 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>*QUOTE* (rescuecpt @ Feb 20 2005, 09:00 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-ffemt8978_@Feb 20 2005, 12:42 AM
> * For example, our district's lawyer has told us that we are not allowed under HIPAA to provide law enforcement a statement (written or verbal) about what we observe at the scene of an MVA. It doesn't matter that the information can be observed and told to the cop by any Joe Citizen driving by the accident. Our lawyer said that since we were called to the scene to provide patient care, we are bound by HIPAA for EVERYTHING we observe on scene. *


There are so many different interpretations - our district lawyer said we must answer the officers questions as long as we remain truthful and don't talk about so-and-so's medical history, but about the pt's actions and behavior upon our arrival and during our treatment. [/b][/quote]
 That's my understanding of the law too, but IANAL.


----------



## coloradoemt (Feb 23, 2005)

> _Originally posted by Wingnut_@Feb 19 2005, 11:57 PM
> * Ahhhhhhhhhh...
> 
> Still sucks, but makes sense. *


 No doubt!!! I really loved that show especially the Oklahoma City tornado episode. I have them all saved on my DVR...  :lol: Now I am stuck with the high speed chases on Wildest Police Videos...


----------



## Wingnut (Feb 23, 2005)

LOL we watch that one too


----------



## shorthairedpunk (Feb 24, 2005)

gone


----------



## ffemt8978 (Feb 24, 2005)

Yes, you can waive HIPAA but there is a major difference between those plastic surgery shows and Paramedics.  On the plastic surgery shows, you waive HIPAA *BEFORE* you go onto the show and before your PHI is released.  On Paramedics or Trauma, Life in the ER you waive HIPAA after it's already been violated.

What I mean is this.  Let's say you have a camera crew rolling footage of you after a MVA, but your unconscious.  As part of the footage, your treatment is videotaped, along with any comments made by your care givers.  Not only is this recorded, but it is being discussed in front of the camera crew, who are not part of your care giving team.

You wake up in the hospital, possibly still on meds, and somebody shoves a HIPAA waiver in front of your face and asks you to sign it.  If you decide not to waive HIPAA and be on the show, then there's a problem because your care giving team violated HIPAA by discussing and recording your PHI without your consent.  Even if you manage to get the entire footage from the camera crew, the fact that your PHI was discussed with those that don't have a need to know as part of your treatment is a major violation of HIPAA.

While it's possible that they could get out of the HIPAA violation, I can see where the producers of the show wouldn't want to take the risk.  Especially with all of the misunderstandings out there about the HIPAA law.


----------



## shorthairedpunk (Feb 24, 2005)

gone


----------



## rescuecpt (Feb 24, 2005)

You'll notice that most times they only say "the victim" or "the driver" is in critical care or whatnot.  In the case of victims they usually (not in every case) need a family member's permission to publish the name.  In the case of perps, once the PD has released the name and condition, it is fair play.


----------



## TTLWHKR (Feb 24, 2005)

> _Originally posted by shorthairedpunk_@Feb 24 2005, 01:29 AM
> * HIPAA has nothing to do with it, anyone on the show or their representative signs a waiver, and yes, you can waive HIPAA. IF HIPAA were the case then none of those plastic surgery shows and whatnot would be allowed on television. *



I was just passing along what I read from the TLC/Discovery Website for the tv show "Paramedics". I'm sure the people who produce the show know why they aren't doing so anymore.. "Siting the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act and new privacy laws"


----------



## ffemt8978 (Feb 24, 2005)

> _Originally posted by shorthairedpunk_@Feb 24 2005, 11:46 AM
> * Following, your theory that this is a violation, technically TV news crews are violating peoples rights when on scene of any event that requires medical care.  Whatever justification you pose to defend this, can then be applied to the other shows as they are technically news, just because its not live, or under the heading "news" in TV guide.
> *


 Not necessarily true, as the media are not considered to be a covered entity under HIPAA whereas the ambulance crews are.

Like I said before, I can see where the ambulance companies (and producers) wouldn't want to take the chance of getting dinged under HIPAA.


----------



## shorthairedpunk (Feb 24, 2005)

gone


----------



## ffemt8978 (Feb 24, 2005)

You're missing the point.  First of all, if the producers of Paramedics decided it wasn't worth the hassle to go through all the hoops created by HIPAA, then that is their right to discontinue the show and state that it is because of HIPAA and the new privacy laws.

Secondly, the photos in JEMS are NOT PHI as defined by HIPAA.  They are photos of EMS that any bystander on the street would also be able to observe.  Notice that they do not include any PHI in the caption of the photos.  We are not given the patient's name or any other information that can trace that photo back to an individual person.  If they included the patient's name, address, or any other personally identifiable information that would allow us to identify the person in the photo, that would be a HIPAA violation unless the patient waived HIPAA.


----------



## shorthairedpunk (Feb 24, 2005)

gone


----------



## ffemt8978 (Feb 25, 2005)

> _Originally posted by shorthairedpunk_@Feb 24 2005, 07:47 PM
> *"If you decide not to waive HIPAA and be on the show, then there's a problem because your care giving team violated HIPAA by discussing and recording your PHI without your consent."
> 
> 
> once again, justify JEMS, the photographer is obviously able to have the same access as a film crew.*


The difference between still photography and video, which records verbal PHI about the patient.

The difference between an emergency responder that takes some photos at the scene and a career photographer that is not in any way involved in patient treatment.  If the photographer in JEMS worked only for JEMS and not the responding emergency crew, it would be a release of PHI if treatment was discussed in front of him.  However, JEMS doesn't have thousands of photographers riding around with emergency crews hoping to get a good photo on scene.  Instead, they rely on the responders to send them photos.

Also, media organizations like JEMS and the local news are NOT covered entities under HIPAA, whereas the emergency crews are.

And again,


> * the photos in JEMS are NOT PHI as defined by HIPAA. They are photos of EMS that any bystander on the street would also be able to observe. Notice that they do not include any PHI in the caption of the photos. We are not given the patient's name or any other information that can trace that photo back to an individual person. If they included the patient's name, address, or any other personally identifiable information that would allow us to identify the person in the photo, that would be a HIPAA violation unless the patient waived HIPAA.*


----------



## shorthairedpunk (Feb 25, 2005)

gone


----------



## shorthairedpunk (Feb 25, 2005)

gone


----------



## TTLWHKR (Feb 25, 2005)

> *shorthairedpunk*



 




They stopped filming new shows over a year ago, it's been all re-runs since.. It was on the Programs > Paramedics page last year, thus my reasoning for stating I read it there.


----------



## ffemt8978 (Feb 25, 2005)

> _Originally posted by shorthairedpunk_@Feb 25 2005, 12:11 AM
> * so youre saying a cameraman riding along is now considered part of an emergency crew? *


 No, I was saying a cameraman riding with an emergency crew puts the emergency crew at risk of violating HIPAA.


----------



## Jon (Feb 25, 2005)

> _Originally posted by ffemt8978+Feb 25 2005, 05:43 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>*QUOTE* (ffemt8978 @ Feb 25 2005, 05:43 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-shorthairedpunk_@Feb 25 2005, 12:11 AM
> * so youre saying a cameraman riding along is now considered part of an emergency crew? *


No, I was saying a cameraman riding with an emergency crew puts the emergency crew at risk of violating HIPAA. [/b][/quote]
 beacause they want to sound cool and play "C.O.P.S."????


Jon


----------



## coloradoemt (Feb 26, 2005)

> _Originally posted by shorthairedpunk_@Feb 25 2005, 01:11 AM
> * so youre saying a cameraman riding along is now considered part of an emergency crew? *


  

I am sure if you just think about this a bit more deeply it you can come to an understanding... What folks are saying is, the camera crews whom are not part of the emergency response crews have no right to be involved in the discussion of  pt treatment. Pretend they just show up on scene as bystanders without cameras. Will you discuss what you are doing with the pt. then?


----------



## shorthairedpunk (Feb 26, 2005)

gone


----------



## TTLWHKR (Feb 26, 2005)

I just posted what I read.. No need to be rude about it!


----------



## ffemt8978 (Feb 26, 2005)

> _Originally posted by shorthairedpunk_@Feb 26 2005, 02:04 PM
> * no, because a bystander is not there in a documentary capacity, nor do the likely have any paperwork that says they can be there.
> 
> So what are all you wall lawyers going to say when the next paramedics type show comes on? where will your solid knowlege of HIPAA be then? *


 Well clear of the camera crews and any possible HIPAA violations.  If somebody else wants to be the test case for HIPAA, so be it.  I will not be that case, nor will anybody I work with.

I do think that HIPAA needs to be looked at again, and some things need to be changed to make it easier to work with and harder to unitentionally violate, but that ain't gonna happen any time soon.


----------



## rescuecpt (Feb 26, 2005)

> _Originally posted by Blueeighty8_@Feb 26 2005, 04:53 PM
> * I just posted what I read.. No need to be rude about it!   *


 Some people!    :wacko:


----------



## TTLWHKR (Feb 27, 2005)

> *Some people! *




I know! What the heck is wrong with me? It's pretty irritable in blue land right now, due to the tropical temperatures in the north. It's looking gloomy and damp with highs in the mid to upper 103's; lows around 100 possibly 98; but that isn't looking too hopeful. It's not looking so bright for citizens of the nose or tongue; they can expect some flash flooding.. and gale force winds!


----------



## Jon (Feb 28, 2005)

> _Originally posted by Blueeighty8_@Feb 27 2005, 12:37 AM
> *
> 
> 
> ...


 WHAT part of PA are YOU in????


Here we are looking at "near blizzard-like conditions" this afternoon and evening. - how can they be "near-blizzard?" what makes it "blizzard-like" anyway???

oh, and it is colder than a teacher's wit here...


Jon


----------



## shorthairedpunk (Feb 28, 2005)

A simple solution to this, as con ed and rewiew are exempt from HIPAA is to have the producers enter into the operation as service o record the calls and what takes place on them for the service to use as QI. HIPAA is not violated. Then if they are able to get a release signed for the footage, they can use it.

The camera crew is an aspect of QI neccessary to record the events, so that end is covered.

There are already services that run cameras for QI mounted in their rigs.


----------

