[Cheryl Lemley]

I would like to know if the postal carrier has to say the actual name of the narcotic to be found in violation of the HIPAA privacy law? And also did she indeed discriminate against the handicapped? His parcel was delivered today after I called the P.O. to find out that a neighbor who also works for the postal service told me that delivery to our address had been stopped by her supervisor who was embarrassed about the situation after seeing me a slight built 60 yr old and a 38 yr old MS patient in a wheelchair! This supervisor also brought the mail they had on hold and apologized for the postal worker's behavior and false report that resulted in my son to suffer withdrawal symptoms and our mail delivery halted as a result. Her indiscretion possibly has alerted my neighbors that my son has narcotics in the home and she has put us in danger of breaking and entering if someone is so inclined because they want these narcotics. I don't think knowing the name of the narcotic is relevant so is it? She said his name and that the narcotic came from the VA. Following is an amendment to the HIPAA privacy law that includes businesses. The P.O. is a business and the carrier an agent of that business. Forgive my typo in the title. "2013 Final Omnibus Rule Update[edit]
"In January 2013, HIPAA was updated via the Final Omnibus Rule.[33] Included in changes were updates to the Security Rule and Breach Notification portions of the HITECH Act. The greatest changes relate to the expansion of requirements to include business associates, where only covered entities had originally been held to uphold these sections of the law.

Additionally, the definition of 'significant harm' to an individual in the analysis of a breach was updated to provide more scrutiny to covered entities with the intent of disclosing more breaches which had been previously gone unreported. Previously an organization needed proof that harm had occurred whereas now they must prove the counter, that harm had not occurred.

Protection of PHI was changed from indefinite to 50 years after death. More severe penalties were also approved for violation of PHI privacy"

[J_9]

I didn't need to read your book as I am well versed in HIPAA (not HIPPA). Postal workers aren't bound to HIPAA laws, only your medical team is. Think of HIPAA as doctor/patient privilege.

[ScottGem]

First, HIPAA covers the relationship between a patient and those providing medical care to the patient. Therefore, a postal worker is not subject to HIPAA rules. HIPAA has nothing to do with this.

However, the behavior of the postal worker was questionable. And you should file a complaint with the local postmaster.

Was the package marked as containing prescription drugs? I'm not that knowledgeable about postal regs but it is possible there are regs that require a package containing such drugs be signed for by the recipient. The postal worker may have just being following regs. I'm guessing this was not the regular delivery person.

Again, please do file a complaint with the local postmaster but forget HIPAA, it doesn't apply.

[tickle]

Well yiu warned us about blogs, and I said please not.

You will get better response if you break into paragraphs.

[smoothy]

A lot of packages require ONLY the addressee sign for it, and ID to prove they are the addressee are required. And this clearly was one of them. My wife can't sign for any of the packages I receive... and none of them contain controlled medications.

And as was said by others...this was NOT a HIPAA violation.

[Cheryl Lemley]

I didn't need to read your book as I am well versed in HIPAA (not HIPPA). Postal workers aren't bound to HIPAA laws, only your medical team is. Think of HIPAA as doctor/patient privilege.

Apparently you missed this amendment... my main question is about does the name of the narcotic have to be said and did she discriminate. The P.O. is a business.

"2013 Final Omnibus Rule Update[edit]
"In January 2013, HIPAA was updated via the Final Omnibus Rule.[33] Included in changes were updates to the Security Rule and Breach Notification portions of the HITECH Act. The greatest changes relate to the expansion of requirements to include business associates, where only covered entities had originally been held to uphold these sections of the law.

Additionally, the definition of 'significant harm' to an individual in the analysis of a breach was updated to provide more scrutiny to covered entities with the intent of disclosing more breaches which had been previously gone unreported. Previously an organization needed proof that harm had occurred whereas now they must prove the counter, that harm had not occurred.

Protection of PHI was changed from indefinite to 50 years after death. More severe penalties were also approved for violation of PHI privacy"

[J_9]

Amendment?

Yes, I must have missed it as your post was very hard to read. Paragraphs are your friend. Please use them.

[joypulv]

The worst part of this is the lost package. This is serious business, and suggests thefts within the postal system. The USPS really does want to know about that.

(I'm very surprised that it was so easy to reorder a narcotic the same day the package was lost.)

As for waiting at the door because someone can't get to the door - no, they are under no obligation to wait. They do have to redeliver the next day, however, IF you fill out a slip wanting that. And since you don't have transportation, that means 2 days later - one to give the carrier the slip or put it in your mailbox, and the next day to get it again.

People within earshot? Not any kind of violation.

[Cheryl Lemley]

A lot of packages require ONLY the addressee sign for it, and ID to prove they are the addressee are required. And this clearly was one of them. My wife can't sign for any of the packages I receive... and none of them contain controlled medications.

And as was said by others...this was NOT a HIPAA violation.

Her supervisor said that she was wrong in not letting an adult sign and he let me sign when he delivered it. That has already been cleared up. Now we are at as an agent of a business guilty of breaking my son's right to privacy for saying out loud outside to someone other than my son that the parcel was a narcotic even though she didn't give the name of it.

[Cheryl Lemley]

I didn't need to read your book as I am well versed in HIPAA (not HIPPA). Postal workers aren't bound to HIPAA laws, only your medical team is. Think of HIPAA as doctor/patient privilege.

This is my first time posting and I am guilty of trying to be to through however I have resolved that problem and would appreciate if you would read the amendment to the HIPAA Privacy Law. Thanks for pointing out my typo in the title unfortunately I don't see where I can edit the title.

[Cheryl Lemley]

Amendment?

Yes, I must have missed it as your post was very hard to read. Paragraphs are your friend. Please use them.

No, I posted the modification after you reply how you were an expert on HIPAA. So now that you have read it what is your interpretation of it?

[AK lawyer]

"... The greatest changes relate to the expansion of requirements to include business associates, where only covered entities had originally been held to uphold these sections of the law. ..."

I think if you actually read such changes to the HIPAA regulations (rather than just a summary of them), you will find that "business associates" means associates of "covered entities" (i.e. health care providers). The post office is not such a "business associate" and therefore would still not be covered.

[ScottGem]

Ok, I reviewed the amendment. My answer still stands, the postal service is NOT a business associate or contractor to your medical provider. They are a common carrier and not specifically associated with a specific medical provider. The amendment was initiated to cover contractors who might become privy to medical info due to their association with a medical provider. For example; a contractor developing a data system for a medical office.

You are wasting your time pursuing a HIPAA violation against the postal worker and especially against the Post Service.

What you have is a postal worker that defied regulations and acted improperly. You might be able hold the Postal Service responsible for this, but I doubt it.

[Cheryl Lemley]

I think if you actually read such changes to the HIPAA regulations (rather than just a summary of them), you will find that "business associates" means associates of "covered entities" (i.e. health care providers). The post office is not such a "business associate" and therefore would still not be covered.

Thank you for interrupting that for me. So a postal carrier has no obligation to be discrete and in this case alerting neighbors that we have narcotics delivered to our home? And she can deny delivery to the handicapped because he couldn't get of the toilet and into his chair fast enough? She is only guilty of being a bad person?

[Cheryl Lemley]

First, HIPAA covers the relationship between a patient and those providing medical care to the patient. Therefore, a postal worker is not subject to HIPAA rules. HIPAA has nothing to do with this.

However, the behavior of the postal worker was questionable. And you should file a complaint with the local postmaster.

Was the package marked as containing prescription drugs? I'm not that knowledgeable about postal regs but it is possible there are regs that require a package containing such drugs be signed for by the recipient. The postal worker may have just being following regs. I'm guessing this was not the regular delivery person.

Again, please do file a complaint with the local postmaster but forget HIPAA, it doesn't apply.

I have filed a complaint and that complaint resulted to the parcel being lost for 4 days for today is the first day acknowledge it being returned to the post office. She is the regular carrier but she doesn't normally deliver the narcotics for federal express does. Regulations for that particular package allowed any adult to take receipt of it and she was making an educated guess what in it because all his non-narcotics are just left in the mail box. I am upset mainly because her unreasonableness caused my son to experience withdrawals because I was unable to get to his meds. The fact that her supervisor got of the phone with me today and delivered them himself shows she was out of line denying my son his meds for 4 days. And that should be illegal since she is not covered by any policy that gave her the right too.

[ScottGem]

Thank you for interrupting that for me. So a postal carrier has no obligation to be discrete and in this case alerting neighbors that we have narcotics delivered to our home? And she can deny delivery to the handicapped because he couldn't get of the toilet and into his chair fast enough? She is only guilty of being a bad person?

You seem to have a problem with interpreting facts the way you want them rather then way they are. No one said anything of the sort. You started this by asking about a HIPAA violation against the postal worker. We have told you that HIPAA doesn't apply here. But we have also said that you can and should file a complaint with the Postmaster, and if you don't get satisfaction, then escalate the complaint. Based on your account, the postal worker should be disciplined at the least, possibly even terminated. But any action against the postal worker needs to be taken by the Postal Service. There is a possibility that you can pursue civil charges against the postal worker, maybe even the USPS. You should consult an attorney about that.

There is a difference between something being illegal and something being a civil wrong. I don't believe the carrier broke any laws, but (again based on your account) she may have overstepped the bounds of what she should and should not have done. If you want redress for that you will need to seek civil action.

[Cheryl Lemley]

You seem to have a problem with interpreting facts the way you want them rather then way they are. No one said anything of the sort. You started this by asking about a HIPAA violation against the postal worker. We have told you that HIPAA doesn't apply here. But we have also said that you can and should file a complaint with the Postmaster, and if you don't get satisfaction, then escalate the complaint. Based on your account, the postal worker should be disciplined at the least, possibly even terminated. But any action against the postal worker needs to be taken by the Postal Service. There is a possibility that you can pursue civil charges against the postal worker, maybe even the USPS. You should consult an attorney about that.

There is a difference between something being illegal and something being a civil wrong. I don't believe the carrier broke any laws, but (again based on your account) she may have overstepped the bounds of what she should and should not have done. If you want redress for that you will need to seek civil action.

Look either the postal worker broke the law or not with what she did. I understand now that she didn't violate HIPAA for she isn't in the health field. Still, I didn't escalate my complaint for the title of the question presents discrimination of a handicapped. The details were in the original lengthy post that I was encouraged to shorten. Apparently you aren't reading the other responses for I am being told my son as a handicapped isn't owed any consideration by the P.O. and if that is true he is being denied service because he can't move as fast as one that isn't handicapped. Also, if you don't think the postal worker did anything wrong by putting my son's business on blast possibly endangering all in the house then you are of the same mindset as the post worker. As I told another responder I have already filed a complaint and as a result delivery of my mail was stopped in retaliation. Other than the lawyer that responded most of the responds I received reeked of egotism and arrogance and rudeness. Furthermore, my response was to you not "we" for I am answering each response individually. I came to this site for answers not to stroke egos or to be repeatedly insulted.

[J_9]

What the postal worker did was wrong and unethical, but it still is not a HIPAA violation.

The quote you stated above refers to entities that are privy to medical information, such as insurance companies, pharmacies, medical billing and coding companies, and the like.

I understand you are upset, and you have every right to be, but the Post a Office isn't required to offer him any consideration based solely on the fact that he is handicapped any more than they are required to offer any other citizen consideration.

You stated, I believe, that this worker was a neighbor. Have you ever discussed your son's medical care with this person? Was the package visibly opened?

Many people get their scripts via the mail these days, it's not unusual, and actually more cost effective.

[joypulv]

He got the meds after 4 days. The PO supervisor acknowledged the poor handling by delivering it personally.
If you want to file a higher up complaint, do it in writing. It won't get you anything. Your PO already knows to make sure it won't happen again - and that's all that this is about.

(I thought the VA delivers a few days early so that no one runs out, even narcotics?)

40 years ago I lived in an apartment and someone with a name only remotely like mine moved out, and the carrier stopped delivering my mail for almost 3 months! Worse than that, none of the First Class mail was returned to sender, as required by law. I was furious that my grandmother was very upset and I didn't know about it until she called me (back in the days when long distance cost a lot of money).

You DO twist concepts. You persist in the notion that she denied 'delivery to the handicapped because he couldn't get of the toilet and into his chair fast enough' when I made it clear that no carrier has to wait for someone, regardless of their handicap or ability to get to the door. There are plenty of laws to protect the handicapped, but making mail carriers wait isn't one.

(I am a former mail carrier, and I would have waited, but that's beside the point - the point is the LAW.)

[Fr_Chuck]

HIPPA does not apply to the post office. The issue of business, applies to contract companies, that may work at and be in medical offices

Example, a doctors office hires an outside computer company to do IT work.

There is no real "right to privacy"

It appears, that they may have broken some postal rules on delivery, but I also feel, that there is another side to the story from the postal person, who stopped the mail delivery.

I would note, that part of the issue with no drugs, seem also to be no follow up.
This package should have been able to be tracked, and found, the first day it was late.

Also, normally most people would have went to local drug store had a order for a few day supplied called in.