Project

NATIONAL HEALTH POLICY VS STATE POLICY IMPLEMENTATION 6

National Health Policy vs State Policy Implementation

Joseph Toole

Case Studies in Public Health

25 Apr 2017

National Health Policy vs. State Policy Implementation

Th e policy selected for this assignment is the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA). The law was passed in 1996 bhe Congress. There are various aspects of the health of Americans covered by the regulation. For instance,d the individual can be able to transfer his or her insurance easily in the event of changing jobs or even losing their job, reduce fraud and abuse in the healthcare industry and protection and confidential handling of patient information. Even though healthcare providers have been protecting the private and personally identifiable patient information, the major changes that were taking place in the healthcare industry and the world as a whole necessitated the development and of patients information that was no longer in hard copies, but stored and transferred electronically. Thie requires that healthcare providers get signed forms from their patients which specify the parties or individuals with who then healthcare provider can share the patient’ s information.

There are various aspects of the regulations that have to be considered especially when looking at the organizations that are bound to comply with the regulation. First and foremost, the law covers healthcare providers such as hospitals and clinics. There are also other related organizations which are either involved directly or indirectly with the use of private personal information with the healthcare providers such as insurance companies and healthcare clearance companies among other related organizations. Even though there are various challenges facing implantation of the regulation the Rule has been able to meet the goal for which it was developed (Anthony, Appari & Johnson, 2014). For instance, with the widespread use of the technology and the internet lack of a protection framework could have easily presented a loophole for the sharing of patients private information for various activities such as marketing hence compromising their security.

The Department of Health and Human Services was tasked with the responsibility of broadcasting the specific requirement of the Rule. Even though the law was enacted in 1996, healthcare organizations and the covered entities had two to three years to comply with the regulation. This was a time that was allowed for these organizations based on their size. The Rule covered various standards that have been developed over the years as a result of the collaboration of the of the public and the private sectors . These were focused on strengthening the areas that the players in the industry were doing well as well as overcoming the major challenges regarding privacy that were looming in the industry.

At the national level, all healthcare organizations, as well as the related entities, are bound by the law to adhere to the requirements of the law. There are various costs, especially legal, that are associated with the violation of the Rule. The HIPAA regulations override any state laws regarding the privacy of patients’ information which is different to the requirements of the Rule. What this means is that any regulation on the topic which does not go contrary to the rule in any way is in full effect in addition to the State Privacy Laws within the various states of the US. However, it is also important to mention that there are certain exceptions which may allow for the HIPAA regulations not to override the State Privacy Laws when they are contrary to the rule. For instance, a State Law that is more stringent than the Privacy Rule, especially in a situation where the two are contrary will remain effective. What this means is that patients are more secured as each of the laws are mainly focused on not only meeting the objectives for which they were formed, but also overcome the shortcoming of the other, (Anthony, Appari, & Johnson, 2014).

It is also important to mention that there was a time when an individual could lose his or her medical coverage when they shifted to another job or even lost their jobs. The implementation of the laws has seen to it that individuals are able to get a smooth transition from one job to another and continue to enjoy the medical coverage that they had acquired. Moreover, as more organizations seek to comply with the regulation, they do so by improving their organizational process such as improvement of their security systems which ends up benefiting all the other departments of the organizations subject to the regulation. The fact that healthcare providers and the covered entities try as much as possible to avoid paying the high cost of violating the law, they are, at the same time, developing a culture of compliance in the organization which will also extend to the other regulation, both internal and external.

Last but not least, it is important to mention that even though there are various aspects of the regulation that can be improved, i t is imperative for the current regulation to be reinforced with the aim of making them stronger in terms compliance and effectiveness . However, the increase in technological advancements continues to increase the potential threats to the security of patients information. As such, it is important to come up with regulation that will see to it that the Rule is able to protect such information from criminal activities such as hacking. Even though the healthcare providers are required not to share their patients' information, the fact that the information is stored electronically exposes it to external threats such as hacking, (Mohammed & Mariani, 2014). This is a move that results in gross violation of the Rule and as such facing server penalties.

References

Anthony, D. L., Appari, A., & Johnson, M. E. (2014). Institutionalizing HIPAA Compliance: Organizations and competing logics in US health care. Journal of health and social behavior, 55(1), 108-124.

Mohammed, D., & Mariani, R. (2014). An Evaluation of the Cybersecurity Policies for the United States Health & Human Services Department: Criteria, Regulations, and Improvements. International Journal of Business and Social Research, 4(4), 1-7.

Murphy, M., & Waterfill, M. (2010). New HIPAA Guide for 2010: 2009 ARRA Act for HIPAA security and compliance law & HITECH Act, your resource guide to the new security & privacy requirements. Bloomington, Ind: Authorhouse.