Privacy and celebrity
I've been following this story much more closely than I did any regarding the paternity of Anna Nicole Smith's baby.
Back in 1994, Anna Nicole Smith had *gasp* breast augmentation surgery here in Houston. Her physician, Dr. Gerard Johnson, videotaped the surgery. Fastforward thirteen years and Ms. Smith is dead and Dr. Johnson has given up his medical license. Something about dementia. Dr. Johnson gives the video tape to a "memorabilia dealer" in LA, who tastefully edits the video to the Jaws theme and adds some Trimspa voiceovers to make the whole thing classy.
I think that the memorabelia dealer started making inquiries to sell the tape, and Howard Stern catches wind of this whole thing. So of course, the estate goes bonkers and sues the high hell out of the physician, the memorabelia dealer and anyone else they can think of to enjoin the distribution of the tape.
The memorabelia dealer settles quickly with the estate and hands over his copy of the tape to them (and it looks like the physician and his wife are suing the memorabelia dealer for following the TRO), but the estate thinks that there are more tapes in the Johnsons' posssession and are continuing with the suit. Today's ruling was against the Johnsons.
I'm here thinking, what the fuck?, HIPAA HIPAA HIPAA. But then I think about it. Is Dr. Johnson still a covered entity? He's not practicing medicine. He's not billing electronically. He obtained the information before HIPAA came down the pike. The Medical Practices Act in the Business and Occupations Code usually governs what physicians can do with the information about their patients in their possession, but this guy is no longer a physician. It's a damned interesting case.
The pleadings cite HIPAA, California law and Texas law.
(BTW, I've been following it for a few weeks now at this "news" site. It's sort of disjointed and weird, but the guy managed to get a lot of the documents related to the case (especially the pleadings).)
Today, the judge issued an order granting the temporary restraining order, and I can feel a little better with the world. I honestly can't believe that a physician would stoop so low as to attempt to profit off of a deceased patient like this, but I suppose anyone can do anything. I think that there's going to be a hearing later on this month that gives the Johnsons an opportunity to reply, but damnit, it scares the crap out of me that some physician thought it was OK to do this.
Back in 1994, Anna Nicole Smith had *gasp* breast augmentation surgery here in Houston. Her physician, Dr. Gerard Johnson, videotaped the surgery. Fastforward thirteen years and Ms. Smith is dead and Dr. Johnson has given up his medical license. Something about dementia. Dr. Johnson gives the video tape to a "memorabilia dealer" in LA, who tastefully edits the video to the Jaws theme and adds some Trimspa voiceovers to make the whole thing classy.
I think that the memorabelia dealer started making inquiries to sell the tape, and Howard Stern catches wind of this whole thing. So of course, the estate goes bonkers and sues the high hell out of the physician, the memorabelia dealer and anyone else they can think of to enjoin the distribution of the tape.
The memorabelia dealer settles quickly with the estate and hands over his copy of the tape to them (and it looks like the physician and his wife are suing the memorabelia dealer for following the TRO), but the estate thinks that there are more tapes in the Johnsons' posssession and are continuing with the suit. Today's ruling was against the Johnsons.
I'm here thinking, what the fuck?, HIPAA HIPAA HIPAA. But then I think about it. Is Dr. Johnson still a covered entity? He's not practicing medicine. He's not billing electronically. He obtained the information before HIPAA came down the pike. The Medical Practices Act in the Business and Occupations Code usually governs what physicians can do with the information about their patients in their possession, but this guy is no longer a physician. It's a damned interesting case.
The pleadings cite HIPAA, California law and Texas law.
(BTW, I've been following it for a few weeks now at this "news" site. It's sort of disjointed and weird, but the guy managed to get a lot of the documents related to the case (especially the pleadings).)
Today, the judge issued an order granting the temporary restraining order, and I can feel a little better with the world. I honestly can't believe that a physician would stoop so low as to attempt to profit off of a deceased patient like this, but I suppose anyone can do anything. I think that there's going to be a hearing later on this month that gives the Johnsons an opportunity to reply, but damnit, it scares the crap out of me that some physician thought it was OK to do this.