Conclusion
Overall, what are the key ethical considerations to be addressed in a hospital setting? Explain why.

What laws or regulations are critical to releasing healthcare and other confidential information to a court?

Evaluate additional strategies that might prevent a lawsuit that a human services agency could incorporate into policies or practices.
What do you recommend human services agencies do to prepare for the release of health records to a court? Use concrete evidence to substantiate claims.
1
Draft Review
Information that can and cannot be released to the parole officer.
Kevin’s information that can be released to the parole officer includes his treatment plan,
the diagnosis made, and the recommended care that he requires after being discharged. This is in
line with the parole conditions, and it enables the officer to be aware of any specific requirements
the mare requires, and any restrictions associated with his condition. Through this, the parole
officer can assist Kevin in meeting the conditions of his parole, such as engaging in support
groups, attending therapy sessions, and taking medication as directed. It also enhances the safety
and well-being as an assessment of threats to recovery and challenges that may arise after being
discharged can be conducted, which will aid in the development of a plan that will ensure
successful reintegration in society and deal with mental health risks that may arise (Petrila &
Fader-Towe, 2010). Providing this information also enhances collaboration among various
stakeholders, for instance, agencies dealing with social services and providers of mental health
services. Open communication ensures that a coordinated approach is taken to address an
individual’s needs and ascertains that members involved work together to assist in full recovery.
Moreover, the continuity of care is enhanced, making it possible to transition from the
psychiatric facility to the society, facilitating support and aiding in recovery.
Nonetheless, information regarding the history of substance abuse and the details of the
mental health treatment accorded to Kevin should not be shared with the parole officer. Federal
confidentiality laws dictate that information that can be shared should remain confidential. These
laws protect client information, such as referral for treatment from a similar program,
2
assessment, counseling, and detoxification. These rules apply to individuals authorized by state
law, officials with search warrants or subpoenas, and anyone inquiring, regardless of whether
they possess prior information. For this information to be revealed, proper consent has to be
obtained from the patient to avoid violating their rights, tainting their reputation, and breaking
the trust they share with the healthcare provider. It can also be shared during a medical
emergency to give the patient appropriate medical care. Failure to adhere to the regulations may
result in disciplinary and legal action.
Legal ramifications for releasing confidential information.
When human service professionals disclose personal information unlawfully, they face
legal liabilities as it breaches client confidentiality laws. They can be fined or sentenced as
determined by the court of law. According to Tariq and Hackert (2023), this information can only
be shared when the client properly consents. They can also face civil lawsuits whereby the
affected individual can sue them for violating privacy. Disclosure of this information may
negatively affect the individual as sensitive information may be shared with unauthorized
persons, which might delay their recovery and affect the relationship they have with mental
health care providers. They may sue for damages from the individual responsible for being
subjected to reputational harm. Furthermore, they will also be accorded disciplinary action from
the licensing board for violating the ethical principles set. The affected individual may present
complaints to the regulatory board, which will result in an inquiry, and if found culpable, the
professional’s license may be revoked.
As for the organization, it will suffer reputational damage as clients’ trust will be eroded.
Their credibility will be doubted due to the inability to maintain confidentiality, which can result
in losses and closure. Organizations can be liable for their employees’ actions, known as
3
vicarious liability. This is because they must ensure that ethical standards and laws are followed
to the latter failure, to which they are liable for employees’ wrongdoings in their line of duty.
Moreover, if the organization is determined to be negligent in upholding confidentiality, it will be
subject to lawsuits, which may result in fines and penalties.
Ethical and Legal Implications in Divulging Confidential Patient Information
The paramount ethical concern arising from the prospective release of Kevin’s
information is the egregious breach of patient confidentiality. The foundational principles of
autonomy, beneficence, and non-maleficence, delineated in the National Organization for Human
Services (National Organization For Human Services) Ethical Code, accentuate the inviolable
imperative to preserve client privacy and confidentiality (National Organization For Human
Services, 2014). Divulging Kevin’s diagnoses, discharge plans, and treatment specifics without
his explicit authorization could constitute a flagrant violation of his autonomy and the sacrosanct
trust established within the therapeutic alliance. Furthermore, such an injudicious disclosure
could inflict psychological harm, contravening the principle of non-maleficence.
To mitigate these profound ethical implications, Stephanie must implement a proactive
legal strategy firmly grounded in the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act
(HIPAA) and relevant state legislation. The HIPAA Privacy Rule promulgates stringent
directives for protecting individually identifiable health information, severely restricting its
disclosure without patient consent or a valid court order (U.S. Department of Health & Human
Services [HHS], 2003). Consequently, Stephanie should resolutely refrain from divulging any
protected health information to the parole officer unless Kevin provides explicit consent or a
court mandate compels such disclosure (Stanhope et al., 2020). Moreover, state laws often
4
furnish supplementary safeguards, and Stephanie should meticulously consult the pertinent
statutes in her jurisdiction to ensure steadfast compliance.
Other issues to be considered
Transcending the confidentiality breach, other salient issues demand judicious
consideration in this multifaceted case. Kevin’s undocumented immigrant status and substance
abuse diagnosis intersect with intricate legal and sociocultural factors that could exacerbate his
vulnerability. The ethical tenet of justice, as elucidated in the National Organization For Human
Services Code, mandates that human services professionals must assiduously advocate for
equitable access to services and robustly safeguard the rights of marginalized populations
(National Organization For Human Services, 2015). Stephanie should remain vigilantly
cognizant of the potential for insidious discrimination or inequitable treatment stemming from
Kevin’s immigration status or substance abuse history and proactively address any implicit biases
or systemic impediments that could encumber his ability to access appropriate care and services.
Moreover, parole officials have other causes to bring and add to the complexity. Law
enforcement agencies may rightly invoke their duty of monitoring under community watch.
However, the privilege is not absolute, as human service professionals will do well to carefully
but judiciously balance these interests against the unchallengeable ethical responsibility to clients
(Stanhope et al., 2020). Stephanie must scrutinize data sharing limits with the police
departments, such as those provided in applicable state laws and agency regulations.
Significantly, she should be confident that the law is observed when disclosure happens.
Prompt and comprehensive remediation is imperative to mitigate potential legal
ramifications and preclude future breaches in the unfortunate event of an inadvertent or
5
inappropriate release of confidential information. Stephanie and her organization should
implement a robust incident response protocol that encompasses notifying the affected client,
conducting a thorough investigation, and implementing corrective measures to redress any
systemic vulnerabilities (HHS, 2020). Additionally, they should proffer appropriate support
services, such as counseling or legal assistance, to the aggrieved client and initiate disciplinary
action against any employees culpable for the breach.
References
National Organization for Human Services. (2014). Encyclopedia of Human Services and
Diversity. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781483346663.n407
Petrila, J., & Fader-Towe, H. (2010). INFORMATION SHARING IN CRIMINAL JUSTICE MENTAL HEALTH COLLABORATIONS: Working with HIPAA and Other Privacy Laws.
https://bja.ojp.gov/sites/g/files/xyckuh186/files/Publications/CSG_CJMH_Info_Sharing.p
df
Stanhope, V., Videka, L., Burnett-Zeigler, I., & Schwartz, S. (2020). Ethical principles and laws.
In Foundations of human services practice: Generalist perspectives (pp. 77-98). SAGE
Publications.
Tariq, R. A., & Hackert, P. B. (2023, January 23). Patient confidentiality. Nih.gov; StatPearls
Publishing. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK519540/
U.S. Department of Health & Human Services. (2003). Summary of the HIPAA Privacy Rule.
https://www.hhs.gov/hipaa/for-professionals/privacy/laws-regulations/index.html
6
U.S. Department of Health & Human Services. (2020). Breach notification rule.
https://www.hhs.gov/hipaa/for-professionals/breach-notification/index.html