HWcase5Q1

 Here is the link to the case: https://www.healthcareitnews.com/news/memorial-hermann-ordered-pay-24-million-over-immigrant-incident

Eight important facts are:

1. Memorial Hermann Health System has gotten slapped with a $2.4 million fine after being found liable for breaking HIPAA rules by releasing the name of a patient who was arrested, even though the identity became public through police records.
2. In September 2015, a patient at one of Memorial Hermann’s clinics presented an allegedly fraudulent identification card to office staff, according to HHS. Staff immediately alerted authorities, and the patient was arrested. 
3. Between Sept. 15 and 19, 2015, Memorial Hermann disclosed the patient’s name through press releases issued to 15 media outlets and reporters
4. The patient was 44-year old Blanca Borrego, an immigrant from Mexico who was arrested at a gynecologist’s office after presenting a fake ID
5. Borrego’s fate since the 2015 incident is not known
6. The resolution agreement, signed on April 20 by Memorial Hermann President and CEO Benjamin Chu, MD, agrees to pay the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services $2.4 million and to adopt a comprehensive corrective action plan.
7. This case reminds us that organizations can readily cooperate with law enforcement without violating HIPAA, but that they must nevertheless continue to protect patient privacy when 
8. making statements to the public and elsewhere.
The action plan requires MHHS to update its policies and procedures on safeguarding private information from impermissible uses and to train its workforce. 

Five questions to ask about the case are:

1. If a patient gives a fake ID and a healthcare provider leaks their information, does it still violate HIPAA laws?
2. Do you think the fine was too much or is it justified?
3. Do you think the hospital or the press was to blame?
4. Do you believe the case was racially motivated?
5. What do you think became of Borrego?

HWProj5

 How do We Fix the Problem?

Problems from the past that have hurt our economy today have only protected the wealth of upper-class Americans. It is true that growth increased drastically after the 1982 tax cut, reaching as high as 7.3% in 1984. However, as the Reagan-Bush, Sr. administrations went on and taxes for the rich were slashed even further, growth fell to negative levels during 1991, at the heart of the last recession. And, two of the three years with the highest growth were during the 1950s, when the top tax rate was 91%. Overall, there seems to be no close relationship between the top tax rate and the GDP growth rate, and statistical analysis backs this up: the correlation coefficient between the two variables is 0.03, meaning that there is essentially no connection. (If tax cuts were strongly related to GDP growth, we would see a coefficient close to -1.) So much for upper-class tax cuts boosting the economy; now it's on to median income growth. https://www.faireconomy.org/trickle_down_economics_four_reasons

I suggest we fix our problems by doing trickle-down economics but in reverse. The ARPA and AJP represent “trickle-up” economics, putting dollars directly in the hands of consumers who are most likely to spend them, creating demand for products and services that generate more economic growth than trickle-down. Consumer spending is 70 percent of the gross domestic product (GDP). But the Trump tax cuts disproportionately benefited America’s wealthiest. The wealthy save rather than spend, so they don’t generate much demand and restrain corporate investment and hiring, widening America’s income and wealth gaps. https://thehill.com/opinion/finance/550007-bidens-trickle-up-economics-is-just-what-america-needs/ 

Lower and Middle-class citizens are less likely to conserve money due to their backgrounds. And as mentioned above, if we give more attention and opportunities to lower-income citizens, the economy will see a return on investment. Rather than giving budget cuts and tax exemptions that only benefit making upper-class citizens richer. This will of course create a more competitive society as now lower and middle-class people will have a much easier time breaking the glass ceiling and making the wealthy work harder to separate themselves from the masses as they want to achieve exclusivity.