Remember faxes? I don't.
A 70-year-old home health care nurse (RN) has sued her employer under the Americans with Disabilities Act and the Age Discrimination in Employment Act.
According to the lawsuit, the employer required its home health nurses to use a computer system (known in medical circles as a "point-of-care" system) to document patient visits.
If you've been to the doctor in the past 20 years or so, you know what I'm talking about. They can review your prior visits on a little laptop that is in the examination room. Then they can take your blood pressure and measure your heart rate, and enter the information directly into that laptop. In this case, the nurses took their laptops to patients' homes and entered the information into the system from there.
But this particular nurse claimed that using the computer system gave her migraine headaches so severe that she was sometimes vomiting in the homes of her elderly, sick patients.
As an accommodation, her supervisor let her write the patient information down on paper and fax it in.
(We still have a fax machine in our office. I can't even remember the last time I saw anyone using it.)
Apparently, the fax machine was in the office of a different supervisor, who did not always provide the nurse's faxes to the nurse's supervisor in a timely manner. (In the other supervisor's defense, who checks the fax machine any more?)
Anyway, the nurse's supervisor retired, quit, or otherwise moved on. Now there was a new sheriff in town who wanted the nurse to use the point-of-care system. According to the new boss, the faxes were often illegible (I don't know whether that was because of the nurse's handwriting or because of issues with the fax transmission), they did not always get to the supervisor in a timely manner, and ‑ most important of all ‑ faxing might violate the privacy rules of the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act.
All of which sound to me like legitimate concerns. But the nurse didn't think it was fair that her new boss was insisting she enter patients' medical information directly into the point-of-care system. So she went to the boss's boss and complained. In that same meeting, her lawsuit says, her employment was terminated. Which, her lawsuit says, was retaliation.
All we have at this point is the nurse's side of the story. The employer has not had a chance to respond. But here is how I imagine that last meeting:
THE LAST MEETING
A Short Story
NURSE: My supervisor is being mean to me. She is making me use the point-of-care system even though she knows I can't do it.
BOSS'S BOSS: Why can't you do it? Everybody else does.
NURSE: I turned in a doctor's note in 2020. Using the computer gives me terrible migraine headaches. Why, just yesterday I tried to use the system, and my headache got so bad that I threw up all over little Sadie Green.
BOSS'S BOSS: You threw up on Miss Green? Well, anyway, using the point-of-care system is part of your job. An essential part, because it is confidential and also lets the nurses report on their patient visits in real time. Are you saying you can't use that system without getting severely ill?
NURSE: Yes, I am.
BOSS'S BOSS: Is there anything that would make it possible for you to use the system?
NURSE: No. The only solution is for me to fax the records in. I will not work here any more if I have to use the system. It's me, or the system.
BOSS'S BOSS: Well, I'm sorry, but since you can't use the system under any circumstances, then we will have to part ways. We wish you all the best in your future endeavors.
NURSE: This is because I'm 70, isn't it?
*FINIS*
Yes, I admit, so far I'm siding with the employer. The age discrimination claim seems to have no merit whatsoever, and the retaliation claim seems like a stretch. But the ADA accommodation claim may not be as clear cut. It will probably turn on whether use of the point-of-care system really is an "essential function" of the job and whether allowing the nurse to fax in her information is a reasonable accommodation. Some of the things a judge will want to know include the following:- Assuming her patients didn't have fax machines in their homes, when and from where did the nurse fax in her patients' PHI? Did she take the handwritten notes home at the end of the day and fax them from there? Did she go to the nearest office store and fax it from there? Did she save it all up and fax it in at the end of the workweek? Any of these possibilities could have raised legitimate HIPAA privacy concerns, as well as concerns about delays.
- Without the computer, how did the nurse review her patients' histories in preparation for the visits?
- What did the nurse do with the paper records containing PHI after she'd faxed them in? Did she leave them lying around in her house until her next trip to the office, or indefinitely? Did she leave them in her car? Or did she destroy them securely immediately after faxing, so that they wouldn't fall into the wrong hands?
- Would faxing the patient information require another employee to enter it into the system once received? (I would think so.) If so, how much of a hassle and expense would that be?
- On the other hand, if delays and privacy at the office were the only concern and nobody uses fax machines anyway, could the fax machine have been moved to the nurse's supervisor's office? Or, could the employer just buy a dedicated fax machine for the nurse's supervisor? It looks like a modern fax machine wouldn't cost much more than $200-300. (Scroll down for the models that use paper.)
- What was the role of the supervisor who had the fax machine? Would she be considered part of the "covered entity" for HIPAA privacy purposes, meaning that it wouldn't be a violation for her to see the patients' PHI? What about other employees who might see the information while it was sitting on the fax machine?
- If the faxes were illegible because the nurse's handwriting was bad, could she print?
- If the fax transmissions were bad, could they buy an upgraded fax machine for $200-300?
- Partner
Robin has more than 30 years' experience counseling employers and representing them before government agencies and in employment litigation involving Title VII and the Age Discrimination in Employment Act, the Americans with ...
Robin Shea has 30 years' experience in employment litigation, including Title VII and the Age Discrimination in Employment Act, the Americans with Disabilities Act (including the Amendments Act).
Continue Reading
Subscribe
Contributors
- William A. "Zan" Blue, Jr.
- Obasi Bryant
- Kenneth P. Carlson, Jr.
- James M. Coleman
- Cara Yates Crotty
- Lara C. de Leon
- Christopher R. Deubert
- Joyce M. Dos Santos
- Colin Finnegan
- Steven B. Katz
- Ellen C. Kearns
- F. Damon Kitchen
- David C. Kurtz
- Angelique Groza Lyons
- John E. MacDonald
- Kelly McGrath
- Alyssa K. Peters
- Sarah M. Phaff
- David P. Phippen
- William K. Principe
- Sabrina M. Punia-Ly
- Angela L. Rapko
- Rachael Rustmann
- Paul Ryan
- Piyumi M. Samaratunga
- Robin E. Shea
- Kristine Marie Sims
- David L. Smith
- Jill S. Stricklin
- Jack R. Wallace
Archives
- December 2024
- November 2024
- October 2024
- September 2024
- August 2024
- July 2024
- June 2024
- May 2024
- April 2024
- March 2024
- February 2024
- January 2024
- December 2023
- November 2023
- October 2023
- September 2023
- August 2023
- July 2023
- June 2023
- May 2023
- April 2023
- March 2023
- February 2023
- January 2023
- December 2022
- November 2022
- October 2022
- September 2022
- August 2022
- July 2022
- June 2022
- May 2022
- April 2022
- March 2022
- February 2022
- January 2022
- December 2021
- November 2021
- October 2021
- September 2021
- August 2021
- July 2021
- June 2021
- May 2021
- April 2021
- March 2021
- February 2021
- January 2021
- December 2020
- November 2020
- October 2020
- September 2020
- August 2020
- July 2020
- June 2020
- May 2020
- April 2020
- March 2020
- February 2020
- January 2020
- December 2019
- November 2019
- October 2019
- September 2019
- August 2019
- July 2019
- June 2019
- May 2019
- April 2019
- March 2019
- February 2019
- January 2019
- December 2018
- November 2018
- October 2018
- September 2018
- August 2018
- July 2018
- June 2018
- May 2018
- April 2018
- March 2018
- February 2018
- January 2018
- December 2017
- November 2017
- October 2017
- September 2017
- August 2017
- July 2017
- June 2017
- May 2017
- April 2017
- March 2017
- February 2017
- January 2017
- December 2016
- November 2016
- October 2016
- September 2016
- August 2016
- July 2016
- June 2016
- May 2016
- April 2016
- March 2016
- February 2016
- January 2016
- December 2015
- November 2015
- October 2015
- September 2015
- August 2015
- July 2015
- June 2015
- May 2015
- April 2015
- March 2015
- February 2015
- January 2015
- December 2014
- November 2014
- October 2014
- September 2014
- August 2014
- July 2014
- June 2014
- May 2014
- April 2014
- March 2014
- February 2014
- January 2014
- December 2013
- November 2013
- October 2013
- September 2013
- August 2013
- July 2013
- June 2013
- May 2013
- April 2013
- March 2013
- February 2013
- January 2013
- December 2012
- November 2012
- October 2012
- September 2012
- August 2012
- July 2012
- June 2012
- May 2012
- April 2012
- March 2012
- February 2012
- January 2012
- December 2011
- November 2011
- October 2011
- September 2011
- August 2011
- July 2011
- June 2011
- May 2011
- April 2011
- March 2011
- February 2011
- January 2011
- December 2010
- November 2010
- October 2010