Donald Trump has 'dangerous mental illness', say psychiatry experts at Yale conferenc

Status
Not open for further replies.
Skeptic Ginger said:
You cited a law you don't understand the vocabulary of.



Classic Dunning Kruger.



Why is it you think no one else is accusing the professionals involved of violating confidentiality laws?
Click to expand...



I'm not accusing them of violating confidentiality laws. I've been pretty clear on that. I'm musing about why, if you are correct and this is valid medical information , it shouldn't be protected.

And it seems that you are the one who doesn't understand the vocabulary of the law. I'll patiently wait for the cite of the law that supports your position, but I'm not holding my breath.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Because anyone can have an opinion about someone's mental status whether they are a psychiatrist or a janitor. The janitor might be right and the psychiatrist wrong, or vice versa, this is not protected health information that falls under the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act since neither is a formal diagnosis and neither person was reimbursed for that opinion.
 
Last edited:
Jodie said:
Because anyone can have an opinion about someone's mental status whether they are a psychiatrist or a janitor. The janitor might be right and the psychiatrist wrong, or vice versa, this is not protected health information that falls under the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act since neither is a formal diagnosis and neither person was reimbursed for that opinion.
Click to expand...
Essentially yes, with some caveats.

It's not whether I'm paid, it's whether I am acting in the capacity of providing care or something related to that care. On duty volunteer fire fighters (in WA State that means EMS) for example, would be covered entities.

In addition, I can say that it is my professional opinion Trump has narcissistic personality disorder. As long as I base that professional opinion public information and as long as I'm not involved in Trump's medical care, then HIPAA does not apply.
 
Skeptic Ginger said:
Essentially yes, with some caveats.

It's not whether I'm paid, it's whether I am acting in the capacity of providing care or something related to that care. On duty volunteer fire fighters (in WA State that means EMS) for example, would be covered entities.

In addition, I can say that it is my professional opinion Trump has narcissistic personality disorder. As long as I base that professional opinion public information and as long as I'm not involved in Trump's medical care, then HIPAA does not apply.
Click to expand...

But if your expert opinion was a proper diagnosis, then I think we should make it apply.
 
BobTheCoward said:
Is the diagnosis at distance debate here dead? I see a lot more use of "expert opinion."
Click to expand...
"At a distance"? Is this your attempt to re-word, 'no in person evaluation'?

We have overwhelming evidence of Trump's disorder available in the public sphere, and it is more than a few news interviews. It is also his actions and there are many of those available in the public sphere to add to the evaluation.
 
BobTheCoward said:
He is fully capable of performing the requirements for president. His mental illness doesn't affect that.
Click to expand...
You cannot support that bull **** assertion.

I have already listed the numerous problems that get in the way of an acting POTUS with Trump's disorder and they are very serious deficiencies.
 
Skeptic Ginger said:
"At a distance"? Is this your attempt to re-word, 'no in person evaluation'?

We have overwhelming evidence of Trump's disorder available in the public sphere, and it is more than a few news interviews. It is also his actions and there are many of those available in the public sphere to add to the evaluation.
Click to expand...

Yes. Are we saying expert opinion equals diagnosis or expert opinion does not?
 
Skeptic Ginger said:
You cannot support that bull **** assertion.

I have already listed the numerous problems that get in the way of an acting POTUS with Trump's disorder and they are very serious deficiencies.
Click to expand...

He absolutely can do the job. Nothing leads me to believe that he will fail to provide a state of the union next year. Nothing leads me to think he is somehow incapacitated from deciding to sign bill or not and doing it in the allotted time.
 
xjx388 said:
I'm not accusing them of violating confidentiality laws. I've been pretty clear on that.
Click to expand...
:rolleyes:

xjx388 said:
I'm musing about why, if you are correct and this is valid medical information, it shouldn't be protected.

And it seems that you are the one who doesn't understand the vocabulary of the law. I'll patiently wait for the cite of the law that supports your position, but I'm not holding my breath.
Click to expand...
So let's see, both you and Bob revised your assertions and now say "should" as opposed to 'do'. No sense posting quotes demonstrating that shift, I don't care.

Back to should: What is it you want me to cite, something that explains to you that in the HIPAA law "covered entity" is not referring to people who hold those positions when they are off duty and they didn't obtain that information when they were working?

It's common sense. If I have a medical records job for a year and I take a year off, do you honestly think HIPAA follows me and I'm a covered entity during my year off? How about my weekends? After work?


Face it, you read something online and you think you understood it but you didn't because you don't understand the basic concept of information obtained on duty vs information not obtained in the course of one's job.
 
BobTheCoward said:
Yes. Are we saying expert opinion equals diagnosis or expert opinion does not?
Click to expand...

Want me to be more clear? It is my informal diagnosis (can't be formal because I'm not providing care to Trump).

What do you think a diagnosis is if not an expert opinion?

All diagnoses are expert opinions (there might be some exceptions) but not all expert opinions are diagnoses.
 
BobTheCoward said:
He absolutely can do the job. Nothing leads me to believe that he will fail to provide a state of the union next year. Nothing leads me to think he is somehow incapacitated from deciding to sign bill or not and doing it in the allotted time.
Click to expand...

So you think all the POTUS needs to be able to do is sign his name and read from a teleprompter? :jaw-dropp

Wow, that's scary if that's all you think a POTUS needs to do.
 
Last edited:
Skeptic Ginger said:
So you think all the POTUS needs to be able to do is sign his name and read from a teleprompter? :jaw-dropp

Wow, that's scary if that's all you think a POTUS needs to do.
Click to expand...

I didn't write the Constitution. The job requirements are there. It says nothing about the quality of the job.
 
Skeptic Ginger said:
Want me to be more clear? It is my informal diagnosis (can't be formal because I'm not providing care to Trump).

What do you think a diagnosis is if not an expert opinion?

All diagnoses are expert opinions (there might be some exceptions) but not all expert opinions are diagnoses.
Click to expand...

There is part of this I'm confused by. Many pages back there were arguments that I understand to be a formal diagnosis can be done while not providing care. Is your position where the debate ended up?
 
BobTheCoward said:
I didn't write the Constitution. The job requirements are there. It says nothing about the quality of the job.
Click to expand...
Not deserving of a reply.


BobTheCoward said:
There is part of this I'm confused by. Many pages back there were arguments that I understand to be a formal diagnosis can be done while not providing care. Is your position where the debate ended up?
Click to expand...
Feel free to dig up the old posts to create this useless semantics argument. Without those I can really comment.
 
Skeptic Ginger said:
Not deserving of a reply.


Feel free to dig up the old posts to create this useless semantics argument. Without those I can really comment.
Click to expand...

To the first part, why?

To the second part, you were in on that discussion back in post 472.

You said the following
Ignoring the additional false assumptions here, the issue of no in-person exam has been addressed multiple times. You cannot support your claim, as is true for others making it, except to stamp your feet and insist.

More than a few psychologists have stated publicly that there is no additional diagnostic benefit in an in-person exam of Trump.
Click to expand...

How did that debate wrap up?
 
I too am an APRN and I think Trump has mental health issues based on his public statements that are incoherent even on good days. However, I have no idea what kind of crazy it is since I haven't examined him. My guess is he is genuinely an ******* with some type of early onset dementia.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom