how sadly ironic
I help out with a local volunteer organization called Neighborhood Senior Services. The crux of the organization is to have volunteers to help seniors who live in their own homes with minor tasks (grocery shopping, help around the house, etc.) and in the case of those who are single, widowed, widowers, or otherwise living alone, provide some companionship in the form of coming by for an occassional visit. Basically, a Senior Citizen version of Big Brother/Big Sister.
So the irony here... I'm taking this very nice lady to the eye doctor for outpatient laser surgery (15 minute procedure... for surgery! wacky.) I wheel her into the opthamology office, take her up to the desk, and after talking with the receptionist, she's handed the check-in paperwork that has medical release blahblahblah at the bottom in fine print.
WTF? This lady who is obviously 80+ years old, with imperfect eyesight, who IS HERE FOR SURGERY TO IMPROVE HER VISION, is supposed to be able to read the fine print? Are you kidding me?
Among my many gripes with our health care system is the clickwrap (or contract of adhesion) that applies to the fine print. You agree to give up all claims of liability, and permit the health care megaplex to do whatever they want with your personal information, or else they won't touch you with a ten foot pole. Same goes for credit card companies, cell phone service providers, ISPs (you know, those "addendums" you get in the mail that change the terms and conditions of your service plan every month).
But seriously, folks... I can understand when people who are able to read the fine print choose not to be bothered by it, but giving fine print to a woman whose vision is poor and is seeking surgery to correct it? And expecting her to just sign it? She signed it, but obviously had no idea what it read.
Does this bother anyone else? It bugs me, that's for sure.
2 comments:
I can maybe make you feel a little better about those forms/contracts (although not the nice little old lady signing something she can't read).
Some of those contracts can be interpreted to be unilateral contracts. In other words, written by one party and the other party "agrees" or adheres to those terms (I can't remember for sure, but I think it's called a contract of adhesion). That's the part that sucks. The part that makes it a bit better is that the courts are compelled to construe a unilateral contract in favor of the party who did not write the contract. That means if anything in it is unclear or ambiguous, it is always interpreted in favor of the other party. So you're not always stuck.
Second, the health contracts/forms essentially ask you to agree to such things as allowing your records to be shared, photos to be taken, etc. This is because of HIPPA. Without that, you're screwed when you want your info shared and you can't sign a specific release allowing the info to be shared. This is because your doctor can't release your info without your express consent. So some of those forms allow your info to be shared amount providers in the same facility and that type of thing.
Same goes for billing; you want your insurance company to pay? Better give the ok so a bill can go out specifying what procedure you had.
And with regards to liability; as far as I know one party cannot transfer or disavow sole liability via a contract in any state that I am aware of. That means if they screw up and there is no question it's 100% their fault, they can't have you "release" them via that contract.
That's my understanding, but I'm not a lawyer, so some of that could be wrong. Regardless, there are some protections; it's not as black and white as the paperwork makes it seem to be.
Heh. I am a teacher of the visually impaired, and I've seen forms like that. I'm sure it drives my kiddos' parents nuts, because it drives ME nuts.
Another pet peeve is when Braille is just wrong. I tend to proofread Braille in public places and, more often than one would think, it's just not quite right.
Patti
Post a Comment