Question

Directions:

Once you answer the Essential Questions above, create and scenario for each answer. Your questions should help you focus on the different laws, how these laws apply in ethical decision making, and solutions to common workplace problems.

Why is health care information protected by law?

a). Health information is any information about a person’s health or disability. It is often sensitive and personal, depending upon the intensity of the illness or the type of treatment etc., which is why there are laws to protect your health information. This does not imply that you have the right to hide contagious diseases which might be a threat to the public, or something which threatens your own well-being in an emergency. Such information may be used to identify the individual and thereby pose a threat to his/her security. Apart from that, it may also provide data and records personal to a patient and allow healthcare providers to exploit the patient by using those records. The purpose of these rules is not to just maintain privacy, but also to ensure that all patient records are taken care of very accurately and systematically with proper measures in place, so that a person can access his/her health records whenever necessary without the fear of ever losing them.

Why does affirmative action only protect certain races/nationalities of people?

b). Affirmative action was created to protect women and racial minorities (largely African and Asian Americans). the idea was to end the discrimination in the society and provide equal opportunity to every American citizen. And these groups of people have been historically not allowed to express themselves and succeed in the society. It is supposed to be different from quota system since it carries targeted goals instead. So the selection criteria is based upon the past discrimination faced by the people of certain races or nationalities, and not on a case by case basis.

Why is sexual harassment in the workplace difficult to prove?

c). Sexual harassment cases are not easy to prove in workplaces, because the events occur in a closed room or a restricted environment, like cases of domestic violence, where there are usually no documented records of harassment (electronic or handwritten). Unlike harassment cases in open or public spaces where there are some or at least one bystander, workplaces are enclosed with people of the same company, who may try to suppress the issue to protect the reputation of the organization, or maybe to save the accused who would be an acquaintance. Also, harassment cases are easier to prove when the accused has created a hostile environment for the victim by stalking on the way or misleading to a wrong place. But in case of a workplace, the victim is usually at that place with his/her consent since he/she works there. Apart from that all harassment cases cause a lot of emotional and financial hurdles for the victim, and in case of a workplace involved, the emotional breakdown is even more, since the victim must be with the same people all the time, who might be present very close to the scene and be in close contact with the accused.

Answer 1

a) Health Care Information Scenario

When you visit your physician, there is often information obtained by a nurse, physician, or dietitian that is added to your patient record. The information is personal to you and it may be possible to identify you based on the information provided, either on its own, or in conjunction with other information. This personal information will be used to evaluate your condition and develop a treatment plan if necessary. There may be numerous individuals in the office with access to the data, however they are considered covered entities as they are participants in your treatment and care.

Also, your doctor may correspond with other health care providers outside of his office regarding your treatment. This can include specialists, laboratory personnel, and your health plan. However, this is permissible, as the privacy rule allows standard communications regarding patient information between two covered entities.

b) affirmative action only protect certain races/nationalities of people.

While the Federal government, and employers funded by the Federal government, are required to observe Affirmative Action in the workplace, corporate affirmative action programs are a strictly voluntary effort to improve diversity in the workplace. Corporate endeavors often take a different form, such as assertive outreach to identified minority groups, as well as mentoring and targeted recruitment.

Companies utilizing these forward-thinking methods find that greater diversity leads to greater creativity and innovation, thus improving the company’s bottom line. While it has been proven that Affirmative Action in the workplace profoundly influences job opportunities for minority groups, studies have shown that quite often current and prospective employees have a negative opinion of the practice. This may be due to the use of such negative terms as “reverse discrimination,” “quotas,” and “preferences.”

Affirmative Action in College Admissions

The workplace is not the only breeding ground for Affirmative Action disputes, as colleges nationwide took up the policy of giving preference in admissions to members of certain minority groups. For years, colleges were seen as filling certain quotas of diverse nationalities and ethnic groups without regard to such requisites as grades and test scores, leading to more cries of “reverse discrimination” against Caucasians.

Today’s global society is certainly a multicultural and ethnically diverse society, making diversity in education an advantage to all. In order to be successful after college, employers and employees alike need to be able to work effectively with others from a multiplicity of cultures.

In light of such significant controversy, eight states have now banned the use of Affirmative Action in college admissions selection processes. California, Texas, and Florida have instituted, in place of Affirmative Action, plans that guarantee the top percentage of high school graduates admission to a state University. This helps ensure those who work hard for it a place at the table of higher education.

In April 2014, the Supreme Court upheld the states’ rights to ban affirmative action in college admissions, enabling them to stop giving preferential treatment in colleges based on race, ethnicity, national origin, or gender, paving the way for more states to change the way entrance to a higher education is achieved.

Affirmative Action Example Cases

Amid the controversy of Affirmative Action, some institutions have implemented policies bringing on even greater debate. Such policies include racial or gender quotas adopted for admission to colleges across the country. These questions have been brought before the Supreme Court of the United States more than once, and have generated some surprisingly disparate opinions. Below are some examples of affirmative action cases.

Regents of the University of California v Bakke 438 U.S. 265 (1978)

In this landmark Supreme Court decision, Affirmative Action policies using race as one of a number of factors considered in college admissions was upheld. The court ruled, however, that defining specific quotas was not permissible. The example cited in this case was the reservation of 16 of 100 seats available at the University of California, Davis School of Medicine to be filled exclusively by minority students.

This case, in which a former Marine officer, Allan Bakke, sued the medical school for denying him admission based on his age, splintered the Supreme Court bench. Of the nine sitting justices, six individual opinions were issued. The bottom line, however was the opinion that, while Affirmative Action was allowed under the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as well as the U.S. Constitution, U.C. Davis’ program of fulfilling a quota of minority student applicants went too far and was not permissible.

c) Why is sexual harassment in the workplace difficult to prove?

In most cases of sexual harassment, it is difficult to gather evidence or produce witnesses as instances of sexual harassment or allegations thereof, are based on behaviour that most typically takes place in private. Also, SH Laws do not prescribe the standard of proof in cases of sexual harassment and as such, this adds another layer of complication in so far as evidence is concerned. Judicial precedents that state that the standard of proof in domestic enquiries should be that of preponderance of probabilities and not of ‘beyond reasonable doubt’. That means that a fact can be said to be proved when a deciding authority either believes that it exists or considers its existence to be so probable that a prudent person ought, under the circumstances of a particular case, to act upon the supposition that it exists. Given the standard of proof required and the fact that most of the times, the act/ allegation thereto takes place behind closed doors, sufficient and conclusive evidence is always a challenge, albeit a procedural one.

Often employees just want the behavior to stop and do not want to make a big deal about the incident. Typically, the matter is settled informally through discussion, training, mediation. Privacy of all parties involved is to be maintained to the highest decree possible by investigators, managers, supervisors, and coworkers throughout the entire complaint procedure (no matter what avenue you choose to file with).

However, many people who file sexual harassment complaints do experience frustration and anger when knowledge of their complaint procedures leaked to people in the workplace. This information in the office "rumor mill" creates an unsatisfactory work environment for the complainant.

While you can do your part by not participating in these types of rumors your manner or supervisor can also assist in addressing such issues. For example, it may be possible for your supervisor to intervene and address specific individuals regarding their participation in the rumor mill. If the rumors persist, they may be considered retaliatory and may provide a basis for another complaint to be filed. Also, your individual health provider program may provide support services to individuals like counseling or support groups.