Treatment Abuse, Behavior Modification, Thought Reform > Daytop Village
Has anybody been to Daytop lately?
odie:
How can I put this gently? You are the most arrogant mindless twit I've met in a very long time. If you want to continue this debate just email me and stop making yourself look more and more like an asshole on this site.
No laws, however stringent, can make the idle industrious, the thriftless provident, or the drunken sober
--Samuel Stiles
--- End quote ---
Troll Control:
--- Quote ---On 2005-08-26 09:52:00, odie wrote:
"How can I put this gently? You are the most arrogant mindless twit I've met in a very long time. If you want to continue this debate just email me and stop making yourself look more and more like an asshole on this site.
No laws, however stringent, can make the idle industrious, the thriftless provident, or the drunken sober
--Samuel Stiles
--- End quote ---
"
--- End quote ---
That's called "projection."
There really is no debate. You don't even know the source documents that you cite in your so-called argument. You didn't even name the correct statute, much less show an iota of understanding of its content.
Why are you calling me a "mindless twit" when you have been self-revealed to be, let's say, "less than knowledgeable" on a subject in which you claim expertise?
Come on, man, for God's sake, you don't really know anything about this. You want to appear knowledgeable by "quoting" laws, but you don't even quote the right ones, and you don't understand the application of them anyway.
Who really looks like an "asshole"? Someone who logically presents facts, refutes your argument by showing the correct information, points out your errors in citing sources, or the someone who cannot construct a logical argument, cites the wrong sources entirely (or were we actually talking about tort law and not confidentiality?), has no education and has never been a therapist, but, when confronted with his glaring mistakes, resorts to name calling?
I think I'll take my chances right here in public. I'm fine with that.
Why are you calling me names instead of just admitting you cited the wrong information in a rush to try to make me look foolish? Your arrogance and one-upmanship reveal your true nature.
Really, all you have succeeded in accomplishing is debasing yourself and providing irrefutable evidence that have not a shred of understanding about that which you portray yourself an expert.
Facts are stubborn things. Cite your sources properly, construct a logical argument and don't resort to name calling simply because you are proven to be inaccurate.
Your behavior is typical of most "programmies."
You try to make a point, show your woeful inadequacy, shift the focus, and, as a last resort, engage in base affrontery and subsequently withdraw.
You're just a prototypical program "bot."
I thought "programs" taught one how to be introspective, recognize shortcomings, learn from mistakes and so forth. This is just more empirical evidence thet they don't work, or at least didn't work for you.
Good day.
Nonconformistlaw:
Hey I just wanted to throw out a few things, even though I am not part of this debate...which, if you know my background...then you know why I am interested and have attempted to keep an eye on it....
Anyway, I noticed the incorrect citation to 42 CRF 6 myself when I looked it up on Westlaw..thanks for clarifying...I wanted to read the correct federal statute to get a better understanding of this debate.
I have one question for DJ....was your analysis for the NY state law or the federal law, or both? Forgive me, but since I've been really busy this week, I haven't read the thread as carefully as I usually would have....Oh, and do you have a citation for the relevant NY statute?
BTW, DJ I am impressed with your approach to statutory interpretation....
Oh, and..reading case law interpreting both federal and state law on the same question is just as important as reading and understanding the statutes themselves....
I hope you guys continue the debate here...I'm fascinated! ::rainbow::
Troll Control:
NCL,
Here is the NYS Statute authorizing release of the information:
MHL §33.13(c)(9)(ii) With consent of appropriate Commissioner, patient information may be disclosed to persons and agencies needing information to locate missing persons or to governmental agencies in connection with criminal investigations.
Here is the HIPAA regulation:
§164.512(f)(1),(2): A covered entity may use/disclose PHI for law enforcement purposes, including in response to a law enforcement official's request for such info to identify and locate a suspect, fugitive, material witness, or missing person, provided that the info disclosed is limited as prescribed.
(P.82815:2,3)
In this case, you can see that the NYS statute is more restrictive and would therefore apply, but clearly authorizes the release of the information.
Here is the State vs Federal vs HIPAA breakdown, as written by NYS:
Fact Dependent: State and Federal laws are generally consistent, provided requestor of PHI fits the definition of "law enforcement official" in HIPAA.
Why I said earlier that the reportage was required by law is because this particular patient was court mandated (confidentiality automatically waived) and the court stipulates mandatory reportage of criminal behavior as part of the conditions of bail/bond or ATI (alternative to incarceration). Counseling notes are also reviewed by an agent of the court on a regular basis.
Again, I will repeat that it is ethically necessary to report that a murder has been committed, even if the patient is voluntarily in treatment. This patient was inappropriate for the treatment setting in which he was placed and was a clear and present danger to the welfare of other patients and the community.
NY also has mandatory reporting statutes for child abuse and elder abuse, as well as some for HIV, but I'm not too familiar with those.
Hope that helps to clarify...
Really the focus of the "debate" I've been having with Odie is more academic. I'm sure Odie is a good person who cares about the people for whom he provides services, but the point is that his argument is poorly constructed and misinformed and the "facts" he cites have nothing whatsoever to do with the matter at hand, as you quickly noticed upon a cursory review.
Furthermore, even though it is crystal clear to both you and I that the source cited by Odie is irrelevent, he resorts to childish behavior rather than simply admitting he made a mistake.
Yes, I do get harsh with people, but generally only when provoked. I have many heated arguments with folks on this site and others that don't result in affrontery, but Odie, as it seems, is not able to recognize what a good argument looks like, but rather tries to ram home a point concluded from false premises. Not very academic at all...
My point is this: If you are unable to even cite your source correctly, how can you draw conclusions from it? Further, how are others who see this mistake labeled as "mindless" when they simply point out the FACTUAL ERROR of the person making the satement? That's plain ridiculous on its face.
Troll Control:
NCL,
Here is the NYS Statute authorizing release of the information:
MHL §33.13(c)(9)(ii) With consent of appropriate Commissioner, patient information may be disclosed to persons and agencies needing information to locate missing persons or to governmental agencies in connection with criminal investigations.
Here is the HIPAA regulation:
§164.512(f)(1),(2): A covered entity may use/disclose PHI for law enforcement purposes, including in response to a law enforcement official's request for such info to identify and locate a suspect, fugitive, material witness, or missing person, provided that the info disclosed is limited as prescribed.
(P.82815:2,3)
In this case, you can see that the NYS statute is more restrictive and would therefore apply, but clearly authorizes the release of the information.
Here is the State vs Federal vs HIPAA breakdown, as written by NYS:
Fact Dependent: State and Federal laws are generally consistent, provided requestor of PHI fits the definition of "law enforcement official" in HIPAA.
Why I said earlier that the reportage was required by law is because this particular patient was court mandated (confidentiality automatically waived) and the court stipulates mandatory reportage of criminal behavior as part of the conditions of bail/bond or ATI (alternative to incarceration). Counseling notes are also reviewed by an agent of the court on a regular basis.
Again, I will repeat that it is ethically necessary to report that a murder has been committed, even if the patient is voluntarily in treatment. This patient was inappropriate for the treatment setting in which he was placed and was a clear and present danger to the welfare of other patients and the community.
NY also has mandatory reporting statutes for child abuse and elder abuse, as well as some for HIV, but I'm not too familiar with those.
Hope that helps to clarify...
Really the focus of the "debate" I've been having with Odie is more academic. I'm sure Odie is a good person who cares about the people for whom he provides services, but the point is that his argument is poorly constructed and misinformed and the "facts" he cites have nothing whatsoever to do with the matter at hand, as you quickly noticed upon a cursory review.
Furthermore, even though it is crystal clear to both you and I that the source cited by Odie is irrelevent, he resorts to childish behavior rather than simply admitting he made a mistake.
Yes, I do get harsh with people, but generally only when provoked. I have many heated arguments with folks on this site and others that don't result in affrontery, but Odie, as it seems, is not able to recognize what a good argument looks like, but rather tries to ram home a point concluded from false premises. Not very academic at all...
My point is this: If you are unable to even cite your source correctly, how can you draw conclusions from it? Further, how are others who see this mistake labeled as "mindless" when they simply point out the FACTUAL ERROR of the person making the satement? That's plain ridiculous on its face.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version