kaiserfraud ([info]corphq) wrote,
@ 2005-03-26 07:10:00
Previous Entry  Add to memories!  Tell a Friend!  Next Entry
Entry tags:kaiser lawsuit, kaiser permanente

KaiserGate: Questions to Ask
Here are the questions I've been asking Kaiser. Unsurprisingly, Kaiser is ignoring them.

1. Who took down the Systems Diagrams in September. If it was Kaiser, why didn't they inform the 140 patients at that time that their private medical information had been on the web for over a year?

2. What were the Systems Diagrams used for? Were they used for communications between consultants? Do the Systems Diagrams still exist in local copies to be used by technical consultants? Have they been printed out and placed in training binders? Were the Systems Diagrams used to facilitate International communications with consultants in India?

3. Why didn't Kaiser inform the 140 patients after they received notice of the complaint from the OCR?

4. Why did Kaiser focus their resources on investigating me for two months after they were notified of my OCR complaint about *them*? At any time Kaiser could have used their investigation and legal resources to get information about who posted the System Diagrams from Tripod. Kaiser seems to have just assumed they were innocent instead of properly investigating.

5. When Kaiser called the 140 patients, why did they feel obliged to blame me for the Tripod site when Kaiser could not possibly prove that?

6. Kaiser originally denied the Systems Diagrams had been posted anywhere, and then they shifted to only admitting they had been on their Intranet. Does this mean they never actually investigated the OCR complaint, which was about the public docviewer.tripod.com site? Tripod, by the way, tells me they can release information on who set up the docviewer.tripod.com site with a "subpoena or parallel legal documentation". Why didn't Kaiser do that?

7. If the Systems Diagrams were originally on Kaiser's corporate Intranet, then isn't that a HIPAA violation in itself since not all Kaiser employees are authorized to view that patient information?

8. If the Systems Diagrams were password protected on the Kaiser Intranet, doesn't that limit the field for investigating who posted them on the public docviewer.tripod.com site?

9. Why does Kaiser's Spokesman continue to use the press to accuse me of stealing patient data and posting it on the Tripod site in July 2004 when their lawyers are holding the proof the Tripod site has been on a public web site and indexed by search engines such as Google since December 2002. I have posted that proof on my blog as well.

10. Will any other whistleblower ever dare come forward when they see what Kaiser could do to me? No one is going to reimburse me for my travel and paperwork costs and the tremendous energy I've put in to trying to find an attorney. And let's not even get started on how stressful it is to try to fend off Kaiser's PR machine as they tell national media that I stole patient data as an employee. My case will add to the culture of fear that keeps employees from holding their employers to basic ethical standards. That will be a serious blow to public accountability.

11. Why did the DMHC issue an Order against me, a private citizen who shouldn't even be under their jurisdiction, and not Kaiser, an HMO entity over which they most certainly have jurisdiction? I filed a HIPAA complaint against Kaiser for posting the Systems Diagrams on the web. If the DMHC sees it as their purview to issue Orders against this practice, why didn't they issue an Order against Kaiser first? This is discriminatory enforcement even if the DMHC is allowed to expand its powers over private citizens.

12. And this one is mind-boggling! In my previous blog entry, I mentioned discovering that I would be featured in at least one presentation at the upcoming National HIPAA Summit. I have now discovered that the President and CEO of the organization sponsoring the HIPAA Summit is Peter Grant, Partner and Chair of Health Law for the law firm Kaiser has hired to sue me! The proof is here. So not only do I have to deal with Kaiser's regular PR machine, it's quite possible that Kaiser's key messages about me are going to be foisted on an auditorium full of influential HIPAA experts! My case should have been excluded from presentation and discussion just on the basis of conflict of interest. :-(

Update: Peter Grant is denying conflict of interest. He is a Partner and Chair of Health Law of the law firm that Kaiser has hired to attack me: of course he has an interest in allowing the HIPAA Summit to perpetuate and magnify Kaiser propaganda!


(Post a new comment)


[info]corphq
2005-04-21 07:00 pm UTC (link)
Addendum for the person who asked me to clarify my whistleblower status. I reported what Kaiser did to the appropriate authorities (Office of Civil Rights), and the same legislation that makes the Office of Civil Rights the appropriate place to go also contains provisions to protect whistleblowers. If Kaiser had performed a proper internal investigation for my original complaint, they would not have tried to frame me later. I also did my best to prevent Kaiser from covering up what they did and to prevent the evidence from being destroyed. No matter what my past was with Kaiser, this was in the public interest and in the interest of the people whose medical information had already been on display on the Internet for over a year.

I recently read an article where the Kaiser PR guy tried to claim that the Systems Diagrams were somehow hidden even though they were on a public web site because they would be buried in many other search engine results if someone typed in "Kaiser Permanente". This is ludicrous. Most people try to narrow their search results by adding extra words. People who were looking to work for Kaiser (or in the medical IT field in general) might have found the site by looking for Kaiser systems. One html page contained a list of physicians. Anyone searching for those physicians might have found the System Diagrams. If the Systems Diagrams were used for training purposes, the URL might have been deliberately distributed as well. The thing no one seems to realize is that the technical diagrams were a bigger deal than the patient information: Kaiser exaggerated the patient information involved, and the only reason I can thing they would do that is that they needed to whip up a matter of public concern so they could get the Systems Diagrams out of my hands quickly. It would have taken Kaiser longer to get control of the evidence if there had been no public fears to play on. Kaiser duped the courts and a state agency to do this, and I hope this eventually comes to light.

As for remarks made about my "disgruntled" status, Kaiser has also used this to deceive the public. Whether I'm disgruntled or not does not have anything to do with whether it was right or wrong to report the Systems Diagrams. The question is how the Systems Diagrams came to be posted on the Internet and how much damage was done by their presence there for over a year. If it's just more entertaining to speculate on my motives, all I ask is that people keep in mind that the press may get the facts wrong (and refuse to make corrections, like the SF Chronicle or NBC). Also, please take a look at the timeline. Over a year went by after I was terminated before I even started this blog, and this blog didn't initially focus on Kaiser or the specific things that had been done to me. In other words, I did not seek revenge after I lost my job, even though I had been badly treated. There were very specific triggers for everything I've done, and Kaiser has yet to be called to account for any of these. It takes a lot of creative writing (or video splicing in the case of NBC) to squeeze me into the stereotype of a vengeful employee, and it just saddens me that people seems so eager to buy into it.

(Reply to this)

about the summit
(Anonymous)
2006-04-25 11:46 pm UTC (link)
If it hasn't happened yet, why not take copies of this page (or other information) and give them to friends to hand out to people going into the summit meeting? That way they'll at least go in having heard another side to the story.

(Reply to this) (Thread)
Re: about the summit
[info]corphq
2006-04-26 05:31 am UTC (link)
I wish I could have done that. The HIPAA Summit was last year, and it was held in Maryland. Even if I had the money to travel, I was knee-deep in litigation in California at the time. Thanks for reminding me about it, though. They just had another HIPAA Summit, and I should take a look at the presentations and see if there's still a lot of Kaiser-sponsored cr*p.

(Reply to this) (Parent)

(Anonymous)
2006-07-24 05:28 am UTC (link)
You should file a complaint with your County Grand Jury to investigate. This will be a Civil as opposed to Criminal procedure.

From the San Diego County Civil Grand Jury website (http://www.co.san-diego.ca.us/grandjury/faqs.html)

Q What do grand jurors actually do during their year of service?
A Grand jurors, working as a team, may investigate and respond to citizen complaints about governmental entities within the County of San Diego, conduct studies of government operations, prepare reports of its investigations and serve as a watchdog to assure compliance with established law and regulations governing county agencies. The Grand Jury must complete audits of county governments, inspect the detention facilities within the county and issue a final report.

Q. What is the jurisdiction of the San Diego County Civil Grand Jury?

A. The San Diego County Civil Grand Jury has jurisdiction over all local governmental entities within the County of San Diego.

Q What is the difference between the San Diego County Civil Grand Jury and a criminal grand jury?

A A criminal grand jury hears evidence of a criminal activity and returns an indictment if the evidence so dictates. A civil grand jury may investigate complaints against government entities and issues reports based on those investigations. A civil grand jury also performs a watchdog function of government activities to insure they are operating in the most efficient manner.


Regarding the internet information that was previously available on the internet, try the WayBack Machine. If the site was crawled, it will give you the date of each change that was made to the site as well as a cached copy of the site on that date. If Kaiser knows about the WayBack Machine (http://www.archive.org/web/web.php), they probably already forced the removal, but if they didn't, then you could use it against them as another violation.

SBD

(Reply to this) (Thread)

[info]corphq
2006-07-24 05:53 am UTC (link)
The web site I found was on the Way Back Machine - that's what I was able to show reporters when Kaiser tried to frame me. I also included screenshots for the legal thing, but they didn't do me much good since the judge didn't bother to read anything I turned in. He basically collaborated with an attempted framing: I really hope that comes back to haunt him.

It's a good thing I did take the screenshots because Kaiser immediately got the site removed from the Wayback Machine.

The Grand Jury idea might be appropriate for the DMHC. Thanks - I'll look into that! I can also point to the fact that the Bureau of State Audits, where I submitted all my evidence about what the DMHC did, just buried the complaint. I bet all it took was a few "phone calls from the top".

(Reply to this) (Parent)

Create an Account
Forgot your login or password?
Login w/ OpenID
English • Español • Deutsch • Русский…