Viral Photo of Staff Flipping Off Newborn Exposes Hospital to Tort Liability
An in-house lawyer was among three executives sent to federal prison in a Medicare fraud scheme involving doctored electronic health care records. The others included the CEO and a former owner of the company.
September 27, 2017 at 01:01 PM
3 minute read
The original version of this story was published on Delaware Business Court Insider
Photo: Circlephoto/Shutterstock.com
In recent years companies, including hospitals, have found a powerful tool in social media. But some have also experienced the legal consequences when something goes wrong. Naval Hospital Jacksonville in Florida, where viral images of newborn babies being mishandled by staff recently originated, may be the latest example.
Such inappropriate conduct, hastened by the prolific use of smartphones and ease of data sharing, can expose hospitals to a number of legal causes of action, experts say. But the risks can be mitigated, they added, by planning ahead and training employees.
Last week, a photo—shared 185,000 times on Facebook—showed a hospital staff member raising a middle finger to a baby. “How I currently feel about these mini Satans,” read the photo's caption. In an online video, another staff member is seen moving a baby to make it look like the child is dancing to rap music.
“We are aware of a video/photo posted online,” the hospital said in a statement. “It's outrageous, unacceptable, incredibly unprofessional and cannot be tolerated. We have identified the staff members involved. They have been removed from patient care and they will be handled by the legal system and military justice.”
Such actions by employees could result, most commonly, in invasion of privacy or intentional infliction of emotional distress lawsuits against the hospitals, said Kristin Michaels, a labor and employment litigation partner at McDermott Will & Emery. In the Jacksonville hospital case, a battery claim could also be brought if the child were handled in a potentially harmful way, she added.
A California anesthesiologist's decision in 2011 to decorate an unconscious patient's face with stickers, a cellphone photo of which was taken by a nurse's aide and spread online, prompted a lawsuit against the hospital and doctor for alleged breach of medical privacy. The plaintiff dismissed the suit in 2014, according to an online docket report of the case.
To help prevent such instances, all health care providers should have a policy that spells out the appropriate use of social media in the workplace, making clear, among other things, that patient privacy and confidentiality must be maintained and that social media cannot be used to harass either patients or employees, Michaels said.
While the company's general counsel should have a hand in developing such a policy, other departments, including human resources, compliance, risk management and information technology, should also be involved, said Jo-Ellyn Sakowitz Klein, senior counsel who focuses on privacy and data security matters at Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld.
Klein said that policies should be developed after a risk assessment that considers not just the legal but the business and public relations risks associated with that particular type of facility's social media use, adding that the analysis should also include consideration of social media-related problems the company has already experienced. There is no “one-size-fits-all” social media policy in the health care space, she said.
“It's really important for everyone to remember that social norms of decency must continue to apply in the online context, as applicable laws certainly do,” Klein said.
Having a policy in place is not enough, though, Michaels said. Companies are well-advised to redistribute the policy and have employees acknowledge receipt on an annual basis, she added.
Contact Kristen Rasmussen at [email protected].
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllWorking Across the 'Entire Ecosystem' Propels Ropes & Gray's Life Sciences Practice
SAG-AFTRA Union Health Plan Slammed With Data Breach Class Actions in Wake of Phishing Attack
What Does Ohio Supreme Court's Opioid Decision Mean for Public Nuisance Claims?
6 minute readJudge Approves $25M Medical Monitoring Settlement Over Philips CPAP Devices
3 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Call for Nominations: Elite Trial Lawyers 2025
- 2Senate Judiciary Dems Release Report on Supreme Court Ethics
- 3Senate Confirms Last 2 of Biden's California Judicial Nominees
- 4Morrison & Foerster Doles Out Year-End and Special Bonuses, Raises Base Compensation for Associates
- 5Tom Girardi to Surrender to Federal Authorities on Jan. 7
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250