BUS FPX 3121 Assessment 2 Technology, Data Security & Ethics in Care

BUS FPX 3121 Assessment 2 Technology, Data Security & Ethics in Care

Student Name

Capella University

BUS-FPX3121 Healthcare Management Ethics

Prof. Name:

Date

Introduction

Technology plays a vital role in transforming the healthcare industry. With continuous technological advancements, healthcare professionals are increasingly seeking ways to enhance the quality of patient care. One of the most significant developments is the integration of Electronic Health Records (EHRs) through Health Information Exchanges (HIEs), which facilitate the secure sharing of patient data across healthcare settings. This integration allows providers to access critical health information that supports timely and effective decision-making.

However, while HIEs promote coordinated and efficient care, they also raise ethical, legal, and privacy concerns, especially regarding mental health records. This paper explores these implications by examining the case of Sarah, a 32-year-old woman with an extensive mental health history who experiences a medical emergency and is rushed to the hospital. The discussion focuses on key ethical concepts such as privacy versus care, informed consent, legal and ethical obligations, and the long-term consequences of sharing mental health information.

Privacy Versus Care

When Sarah arrives at the hospital for emergency treatment, the medical team accesses the HIE database to gather critical information about her health status. During this process, they discover her ongoing mental health treatment. This situation presents a dilemma: should the staff access her mental health records to guide treatment, or should they protect her privacy and refrain from doing so?

From an ethical standpoint, healthcare professionals must balance beneficence—acting in the patient’s best interest—with autonomy, which emphasizes the patient’s right to control her personal data (Morrison, 2019). Accessing Sarah’s records could help avoid harmful interactions or misinformed treatments, such as administering medications that may conflict with her psychiatric prescriptions. However, doing so without explicit consent may violate her privacy and autonomy.

The emergency team must carefully evaluate whether accessing Sarah’s mental health history is necessary for providing life-saving care. If they determine that doing so is essential for her well-being, the principle of beneficence justifies this action. Nonetheless, they must ensure that such access is limited, confidential, and strictly relevant to her immediate medical needs.

Ethical Principle	Definition	Application in Sarah’s Case
Beneficence	Doing good; acting in the patient’s best interest	Accessing records to ensure safe, effective emergency treatment
Autonomy	Respecting patient’s right to control personal data	Limiting access to only what is necessary and informing Sarah afterward
Nonmaleficence	Avoiding harm	Preventing harm from lack of information or misuse of sensitive data

(Adapted from Morrison, 2019)

Informed Consent

The concept of informed consent is central to the ethical and legal management of Sarah’s medical information. Informed consent ensures that patients understand and agree to how their medical records are accessed or shared (Morrison, 2019). However, emergencies complicate this process, as patients may be unconscious or unable to provide immediate consent.

Under HIPAA, healthcare providers are generally permitted to access patient data for treatment without explicit consent, except for specific categories like psychotherapy notes or substance use records (Vemuri & Dunn, 2017). In Sarah’s situation, if her mental health providers are unreachable, the medical team may justifiably access her records to make urgent treatment decisions. Still, they must inform Sarah once she regains capacity and document how her data was used during her care.

To maintain ethical integrity, once Sarah stabilizes, her healthcare providers must obtain her informed consent for any continued use of her mental health information. This approach respects her autonomy while ensuring compliance with both legal and ethical standards.

Legal and Ethical Obligations

Healthcare professionals must navigate both legal mandates and ethical duties when handling sensitive information. The Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) protects patient privacy and restricts the sharing of medical information without consent, except in emergencies or when it is necessary for care (Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 [HIPAA], 2024).

In Sarah’s case, accessing her mental health records could align with the ethical principles of beneficence and nonmaleficence, as it supports optimal treatment and prevents harm. However, the principle of autonomy requires respecting her right to control her data, and justice demands that her information be handled fairly and transparently.

Healthcare professionals must document all decisions to access mental health records, providing clear justification for their actions. This transparency ensures accountability and maintains trust between patients and providers.

Long-Term Consequences

Decisions regarding access to mental health records can have lasting implications for both patients and healthcare systems. If Sarah learns that her records were accessed without explicit consent, she may feel that her privacy was violated, potentially leading to loss of trust in the healthcare system. This mistrust could discourage her from seeking future medical or mental health care, or from being open about sensitive information during future visits.

To mitigate this, healthcare providers should communicate transparently with Sarah after her emergency, explaining that her information was accessed solely to ensure her safety and quality care. Reassuring her of ongoing confidentiality can help restore trust.

In the broader context, healthcare systems must strive to balance data protection with care coordination. Establishing clear policies and ethical standards can help ensure that technology serves both patient safety and privacy.

Conclusion

Accessing a patient’s mental health records through an HIE in emergency situations presents complex legal, ethical, and privacy challenges. In Sarah’s case, her medical team faced the difficult task of deciding whether to access her sensitive information to provide better care. To make ethical and lawful decisions, providers must balance principles of beneficence, nonmaleficence, autonomy, and justice, while adhering to HIPAA regulations.

The long-term trust between patients and healthcare providers depends on maintaining transparency, respecting consent, and ensuring confidentiality. By carefully navigating these ethical boundaries, healthcare professionals can uphold patient rights while delivering safe and effective care.

References

Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (HIPAA). (2024, September 10). Public Health Law.
https://www.cdc.gov/phlp/php/resources/health-insurance-portabilityand-accountability-act-of-1996-hipaa.html

Morrison, E. E. (2019). Ethics in Health Administration: A Practical Approach for Decision Makers (4th ed.). Jones & Bartlett Learning.
https://capella.vitalsource.com/books/9781284194319

BUS FPX 3121 Assessment 2 Technology, Data Security & Ethics in Care

Vemuri, M., & Dunn, L. B. (2017). Ethical and clinical issues in integrated care settings: Patient privacy concerns and electronic health records. Focus (American Psychiatric Publishing), 15(3), 301–305.
https://doi.org/10.1176/appi.focus.20170018