Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Photography Talk by Genre General Photography Talk 
Thread started 10 May 2011 (Tuesday) 12:13
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

I almost got arrested last night!

 
thebishopp
Goldmember
1,903 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Jun 2008
Location: Indiana
     
May 16, 2011 20:19 |  #151

Channel One wrote in post #12402077 (external link)
That is somewhat of a misnomer, first of all many agencies (usually a arm of a government body) do issue press credentials which in turn allows or disallows access to certain events such as crime scenes, those who are credentialed may be allowed within the police barriers while those without will remain behind the barriers with the rest of the citizenry. Also many events require the display of a “official” press credential before they will issue their own access credentials as a method of controlling both access and security to those events.

Now is it important to note if an official agency (government) issues press credentials the USSC has ruled they must 1. issue them to all who apply and meet the qualifications and 2. they must not make the cost of the process not unduly expensive or burdensome, however the USSC stopped short of defining the terms “qualify” and “expensive or burdensome.”

Here locally even though both Broward and Miami Dade will by request supply “government issued” media credentials most media issue their own credentials and they are for the most part accepted by the officials controlling access however there are always exceptions that the “government issued” credentials will get one around, however generally speaking once they a single representative of media is allowed to have access they let the entire zoo in, the exceptions being high risk events involving very tight security.

Conversely there are also credentials issued for access by the organizers of events and they can pick and choose who they will and who they will not allow access or where and who they will allow access to regardless of a person “official” credentials or who issued them.

Wayne

Of course agencies can issue their own credentials but these are not "licenses" in the sense that they are required for you to be recognized as a "journalist". They may or may not be required to grant you access to private events not held on public property or events subject to "national security" requirements. The organizers of a private event are also able to legally pick and choose who they allow into their event, whether you are a journalist or not.

I do not think we are in disagreement here. I was pointing out to that fellow who was insisting that a license had to be granted to be considered a photojournalist that that was simply not the case. In fact, at least in the U.S., there is no such licensing requirement by the government.


"Please use the comments to demonstrate your own ignorance, unfamiliarity with empirical data, ability to repeat discredited memes, and lack of respect for scientific knowledge. Also, be sure to create straw men and argue against things I have neither said nor even implied. Any irrelevancies you can mention will also be appreciated. Lastly, kindly forgo all civility in your discourse . . . you are, after all, anonymous." My Zen (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
spkerer
Senior Member
Avatar
953 posts
Likes: 30
Joined Mar 2008
Location: Leesburg, VA USA
     
May 16, 2011 20:38 |  #152

thebishopp wrote in post #12422809 (external link)
I agree. It has been established in courts time and time again that when in PUBLIC, you do not have a right to privacy. It also seems that it would be a matter of common sense.

I agree. I think differences to that may come into play when someone is involuntarily forced either into public, or forced to remain in public against their will.

For example, you may be venturing out modestly dressed going from your house to your son's house. You get into an accident - and just to remove this point, the accident is undeniably the fault of someone else. Now you're extricated from the vehicle and exposed while the medics work on you.

You were out in public, but never intending or reasonably expecting to be in this situation. And you're not in control anymore.

Does the public have the right to photograph you when there aren't enough emergency personnel to block the view or yell "no photos"?

What about when there are enough personnel on site, what rights do the victim (or patient if you prefer) have in this case? The first responders are legally obligated to take reasonable measures to protect the privacy of the patients. How do those legal obligations mesh with a photographer's right to photograph?

I don't know the answers to these - I'd love knowledgeable answers.


Leesburg, Virginia
http://photos.kusterer​s.net (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
WaltA
Goldmember
Avatar
3,863 posts
Gallery: 10 photos
Likes: 111
Joined Feb 2006
Location: Ladysmith, BC, Canada
     
May 17, 2011 13:05 |  #153

Exactly. Well said.

When does an "abnormal circumstance" cause the rights of one individual (or group) to over-ride the rights of another individual (or group)?


Walt
400D, 5D, 7D and a bag of stuff

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
moose10101
registered smartass
1,680 posts
Gallery: 10 photos
Likes: 247
Joined May 2010
Location: Maryland, USA
     
May 17, 2011 14:05 |  #154

spkerer wrote in post #12422985 (external link)
The first responders are legally obligated to take reasonable measures to protect the privacy of the patients. How do those legal obligations mesh with a photographer's right to photograph?

Give us a link to those legal obligations, and we might get some idea. I couldn't find any, but that may be due to my search results being flooded with info about protecting the privacy of medical records. Any EMT's out there?




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
spkerer
Senior Member
Avatar
953 posts
Likes: 30
Joined Mar 2008
Location: Leesburg, VA USA
     
May 17, 2011 14:42 |  #155

moose10101 wrote in post #12427620 (external link)
Give us a link to those legal obligations, and we might get some idea. I couldn't find any, but that may be due to my search results being flooded with info about protecting the privacy of medical records. Any EMT's out there?

That's a very good and complex question. It involves federal civil rights laws (including HIPAA) as well as state and possibly local laws. I suspect much of it is also determined by case law.

I am not a lawyer, I don't play one on TV, and I didn't sleep at a Holiday Inn Express, so I'm not going to venture into answering this one. The only answer I could give would be very incomplete and immediately subject to being torn apart in a forum like this.


Leesburg, Virginia
http://photos.kusterer​s.net (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
alann
Goldmember
2,609 posts
Gallery: 2 photos
Likes: 35
Joined Nov 2007
Location: South Carolina
     
May 17, 2011 14:52 |  #156

HIPPA has nothing to do with this type of situation. Below is an explanation of HIPPA and it's use. I have worked under this law for many years as a Optician.

"The Office for Civil Rights enforces the HIPAA Privacy Rule, which protects the privacy of individually identifiable health information; the HIPAA Security Rule, which sets national standards for the security of electronic protected health information; and the confidentiality provisions of the Patient Safety Rule, which protect identifiable information being used to analyze patient safety events and improve patient safety."


My FLickrPage (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
WaltA
Goldmember
Avatar
3,863 posts
Gallery: 10 photos
Likes: 111
Joined Feb 2006
Location: Ladysmith, BC, Canada
     
May 17, 2011 15:08 |  #157

moose10101 wrote in post #12427620 (external link)
Give us a link to those legal obligations, and we might get some idea. I couldn't find any, but that may be due to my search results being flooded with info about protecting the privacy of medical records. Any EMT's out there?

How about this one - I know its over 10 years old but its a start ....

http://www.rbs2.com/pr​ivacy.htm (external link)

And an interesting study of Privacy laws in many countries.

http://www.uoltj.ca …2.uoltj.Levin.3​57-395.pdf (external link)

In that last site is this statement - which I found interesting

2.1.2. US Constitutional Concerns and Privacy
The absence of a constitutional right to privacy (particularly in light of its
existence in several state constitutions) gives rise to two broad constitutional
concerns regarding privacy. The first is that the US piecemeal approach will result
in various privacy-protecting acts clashing with well-established constitutional
rights. As a result, these Acts and their protection of privacy will be watered
down if not stricken down outright. The second is that the US Constitution with
its supporting body of jurisprudence does not provide adequate privacy
protection, especially in light of continuing technological development. Privacy
advocates fear that many such developments, such as public video surveillance,
will, if they come before the courts, be simply ruled to be constitutional and the
privacy right not “worthy” of the Constitution’s protection in that context.


Walt
400D, 5D, 7D and a bag of stuff

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
spkerer
Senior Member
Avatar
953 posts
Likes: 30
Joined Mar 2008
Location: Leesburg, VA USA
     
May 17, 2011 15:16 |  #158

alann wrote in post #12427870 (external link)
HIPPA has nothing to do with this type of situation. Below is an explanation of HIPPA and it's use. I have worked under this law for many years as a Optician.

"The Office for Civil Rights enforces the HIPAA Privacy Rule, which protects the privacy of individually identifiable health information; the HIPAA Security Rule, which sets national standards for the security of electronic protected health information; and the confidentiality provisions of the Patient Safety Rule, which protect identifiable information being used to analyze patient safety events and improve patient safety."

Are you suggesting HIPAA has nothing to do with EMS responders on emergency scenes? If so, I'd suggest you do more digging. Since information is electronically transmitted from the EMS providers, they and agents acting on their behalf - which includes any EMS first responders are bound by HIPAA. That includes the obligation to protect covered patient privacy even if that patient may be laid out on a public right of way receiving care.

In the most egregious case, a first responder encouraging a bystander to photograph a patient showing both the identifiable patient and their injuries would be breaching that that required patient confidentiality.

Where things get gray and I do not know the law well enough to know is what are "reasonable" precautions to protect privacy on an emergency scene. I suspect some of those answers may only be answered in a trial.

But yes, EMS providers ARE abound by HIPAA since they are acting on behalf or or as agents of a covered entity.


Leesburg, Virginia
http://photos.kusterer​s.net (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
moose10101
registered smartass
1,680 posts
Gallery: 10 photos
Likes: 247
Joined May 2010
Location: Maryland, USA
     
May 17, 2011 15:27 |  #159

spkerer wrote in post #12428023 (external link)
Since information is electronically transmitted from the EMS providers, they and agents acting on their behalf - which includes any EMS first responders are bound by HIPAA. That includes the obligation to protect covered patient privacy even if that patient may be laid out on a public right of way receiving care.

This is the second time you've said this, and I again ask you for links to substantiate it. This thread is not about data; where did you see info about the legal requirement to protect the patient's physical privacy?

spkerer wrote in post #12428023 (external link)
In the most egregious case, a first responder encouraging a bystander to photograph a patient showing both the identifiable patient and their injuries would be breaching that that required patient confidentiality.

Let's dispense with the egregious cases and just address the everyday, run of the mill case. I get hit by a car. Are EMT's legally required to physically shield me as I am treated?




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
WaltA
Goldmember
Avatar
3,863 posts
Gallery: 10 photos
Likes: 111
Joined Feb 2006
Location: Ladysmith, BC, Canada
     
May 17, 2011 15:38 |  #160

Heres a post from an EMS company about accident photography.

http://www.jems.com …cene-photography-legaliti (external link)


Walt
400D, 5D, 7D and a bag of stuff

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
alann
Goldmember
2,609 posts
Gallery: 2 photos
Likes: 35
Joined Nov 2007
Location: South Carolina
     
May 17, 2011 15:49 |  #161

spkerer wrote in post #12428023 (external link)
Are you suggesting HIPAA has nothing to do with EMS responders on emergency scenes? If so, I'd suggest you do more digging. Since information is electronically transmitted from the EMS providers, they and agents acting on their behalf - which includes any EMS first responders are bound by HIPAA. That includes the obligation to protect covered patient privacy even if that patient may be laid out on a public right of way receiving care.

In the most egregious case, a first responder encouraging a bystander to photograph a patient showing both the identifiable patient and their injuries would be breaching that that required patient confidentiality.

Where things get gray and I do not know the law well enough to know is what are "reasonable" precautions to protect privacy on an emergency scene. I suspect some of those answers may only be answered in a trial.

But yes, EMS providers ARE abound by HIPAA since they are acting on behalf or or as agents of a covered entity.

I suggest you do not read into comments! :) I stated that HIPPA deals with INFORMATION not protecting a victom from a PHOTOGRAPHER. :) If it did we would have to get anyone photographed to sign a HIPPA release. And when did I say EMTs are NOT BOUND by HIPPA? Seems you read and hear exactly what you want to. It is obvious that you will argue forever so I now rest my case on HIPPA. You must be correct. I must have been trainied incorrectly as both an EMT (by the way I served as an EMT Instructor for 3 years as well) and as an Optician. Thank you for letting me know this. I will immidiatly re-train my staff! I am now done with this subject. :)


My FLickrPage (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
thebishopp
Goldmember
1,903 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Jun 2008
Location: Indiana
     
May 17, 2011 16:31 |  #162

That article with Chavez leaves out a lot. From what I recall from the original information he was smack dab in the middle of it. He wasn't off to the side at a reasonable distance and was actually walking around the accident scene with the first responders. Also, isn't this the case where he drives a tricked out ambulance that makes him look like a first responder or firefighter?


"Please use the comments to demonstrate your own ignorance, unfamiliarity with empirical data, ability to repeat discredited memes, and lack of respect for scientific knowledge. Also, be sure to create straw men and argue against things I have neither said nor even implied. Any irrelevancies you can mention will also be appreciated. Lastly, kindly forgo all civility in your discourse . . . you are, after all, anonymous." My Zen (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
spkerer
Senior Member
Avatar
953 posts
Likes: 30
Joined Mar 2008
Location: Leesburg, VA USA
     
May 17, 2011 16:38 |  #163

alann wrote in post #12428244 (external link)
I suggest you do not read into comments! :) I stated that HIPPA deals with INFORMATION not protecting a victom from a PHOTOGRAPHER. :) If it did we would have to get anyone photographed to sign a HIPPA release. And when did I say EMTs are NOT BOUND by HIPPA? Seems you read and hear exactly what you want to. It is obvious that you will argue forever so I now rest my case on HIPPA. You must be correct. I must have been trainied incorrectly as both an EMT (by the way I served as an EMT Instructor for 3 years as well) and as an Optician. Thank you for letting me know this. I will immidiatly re-train my staff! I am now done with this subject. :)

Chill, man! I'm not trying to argue this endlessly. I've already said I don't know the law enough to get into details.

And someone's EMS trainers need re-training... either yours or mine. Because we've taught and been taught two different things on HIPAA applying to first responders.

I would love to hear from someone with competent legal knowledge on this. Until that time, I'll go by what I've been trained since if anything that seems to be on the side of caution.


Leesburg, Virginia
http://photos.kusterer​s.net (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Channel ­ One
Goldmember
Avatar
1,649 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Nov 2010
Location: Fort Lauderdale
     
May 17, 2011 16:57 |  #164

alann wrote in post #12422696 (external link)
Not to argue as you do make some valid points. However (and this is in response to your blanket statement of "the right of everyone else to their privacy". I am under the impression that one does not have the "right" to expect privacy in a public place.



Generally speaking the courts have ruled no one has the “expectation of privacy” in public places, however there have been many court rulings where the expectation of privacy has held due to the circumstances that placed the plaintiff into a “public” space.

Wayne


Madness takes its toll, please have exact change. (external link)

NPPA Member District 6.
SMPTE Atlanta.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

15,420 views & 0 likes for this thread
I almost got arrested last night!
FORUMS Photography Talk by Genre General Photography Talk 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is KopiLuwak
793 guests, 199 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.