Peter -- I hate to disagree, but look at the definition of "organized healthcare arrangement." That definition was specifically placed in the rules to allow for this situation where physicians have staff privileges at hospitals and healthcare facilities but are not members of the workforce. Also, look at the preamble to the Rules at pp. 82494, top of column 2. There is a specific statement that "the most common example of [an] organized healthcare arrangement is the hospital setting, where a hospital and a physician with staff privileges are the hospital together provide treatment to the individual. No separate consents and No business associate contracts are required because this is part of "health care operations." Others in this arrangement that are not there to provide healthcare may need BA contracts, but generally you should not need BA contract provisions for physicians and other clinicians.
-----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, November 14, 2001 11:41 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Business Associate Contracts Cindy, In my humble opinion, the determinative issue is not whether the party to whom the protected health information (PHI) is entrusted is a covered entity, but whether the covered entity receiving the PHI is performing some function or service on behalf of the other covered entity. �If the answer is affirmative, then a business associate contract would be required. �You would need consider whether under your interpretation of the law (and that of your counsel, of course) �you would deem the physicians to be performing a function with the PHI on behalf of the nursing home. �It could be argued that the physicians would not be performing �functions using the PHI for the nursing home, but �for patients. �More facts would be required to do the appropriate analysis. �With regard to the "fiscal intermediaries, " you've already concluded that they are covered entities. �Again, you would have to determine whether they, too, are performing functions for the benefit of or on behalf of a covered entity who is entrusting PHI to them. Peter ************************************************ Peter B. Goldstein Cap Gemini Ernst & Young, US LLC 4610 South Ulster Street, Suite 600 Denver, Colorado �80237-4323 (303) 796-4148 (Direct) (413) 740-0512 (Facsimile) cap comm: 657 4653 [EMAIL PROTECTED] ************************************************ ********************************************************************** To be removed from this list, go to: http://snip.wedi.org/unsubscribe.cfm?list=privacy and enter your email address. "paulhastings.com" made the following annotations on 11/14/01 12:36:57 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ ============================================================================== The information transmitted is intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged material. Any review, retransmission, dissemination or other use of, or taking of any action in reliance upon, this information by persons or entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited. If you received this in error, please contact the sender and delete the material from all computers. For additional information on Paul, Hastings, Janofsky & Walker LLP, please see our website at paulhastings.com. To send an e-mail to our attorneys, in most cases, our address is composed of conventional first name and last name plus @paulhastings.com. Here are two examples: [EMAIL PROTECTED] and [EMAIL PROTECTED] A directory of our attorneys and a link to their e-mail address is located at the website. If you have any questions, please contact us at [EMAIL PROTECTED] ============================================================================== ********************************************************************** To be removed from this list, go to: http://snip.wedi.org/unsubscribe.cfm?list=privacy and enter your email address.
