For the record, my name is NOT Jon Burk, and just about every detail of the below story was altered to protect confidetiallity. I am the last person on earth to want to see my mother or her client get busted...the only things in the story that are true are 1) A power company (not FPL) IS planning on islanding, and 2) a y2k project manager is praying about embedded systems. That much IS true!!

So please give me a break with all the insults!

-- Jon Burk (j_burk@hotmail.com), October 16, 1999

Answers

Your mother should not be divulging confidential information.

You should not be encouraging her to get her client to divulge additional information.

-- Wilferd (WilferdW@aol.com), October 16, 1999.

Wilferd,

Isn't it time for your programmer to clean your circuit-board?

Liberty

-- Liberty (liberty@theready.now), October 16, 1999.

Liberty,

I'm rather surprised at your answer. I've always read your posts with great interest, in part, because I perceive you hold the notion that individuals should strive to "Do the right thing".

I've got over 25 years experience in the health care industry. I am/was appalled at the extreme lack of ethics the poster and his mother used with regards to the client, and the information garnered.

I'm all for sharing insider stories, IF a compromise of ethics is not breached. Patient confidentiality has *always* been a stickler with me. It is a privacy issue, and I'm sure you understand the ramifications of what happens when privacy is breeched.

On this subject, my circuit boards will *always* be stuck.

-- Wilferd (WilferdW@aol.com), October 16, 1999.

Excuse me! Wilferd, get over your self-righteousness and get a grip!

Research using anonymous case information in single case studies is done all the time by social researchers.

There is no breach of confidentiality of an anonymous poster posting information gathered by an anonyous therapist from an anonymous client about a name-protected company!!!

Please, when you want to be self-righteous, know what you are talking abou!! Get educated regarding social research and learn something beyond your narrow expertise.

Leslie, MSW, MRA, CRC/R

-- Leslie (***@***.net), October 16, 1999.

Leslie, babe,

I believe that despite all of your professional 'expertise', you have *completely* missed the point.

I care not one whit that the poster used a pseudonym, nor that he changed the name of the company that is having trouble. That is immaterial.

I *am* disturbed that a supposed 'professional' would breach the confidentiality of a patient to a family member, perhaps because said professional knew her son was interested in the subject matter. Good dinner table conversation? A bonding moment? Whatever her motivation, it was irresponsible professionally.

I suppose you think that is OK? That she 'drew the line' because she has not yet capitulated to her son's request of asking 'certain' questions?

Pitiful. Sorry you don't get it. Sure hope your clients don't share 'juicy tid-bits' with you in confidence.

-- Wilferd (WilferdW@aol.com), October 16, 1999.

Wilfred, Haven't you ever heard the one on how the people who REALLY need a shrink, are shrinks themselves? If "Mom" felt the need to start puking to her son, and believed he had the good sense to keep the info, if not to himself/private, then anonymous, then hey...lighten up. If the standard of medical care is the worry, then I agree to a certain degree...

Got Malpractice Insurance?

-- Billy Boy (Rakkasan@Yahoo.com), October 16, 1999.

Let me ask ALL of you a question (including Wilfred)...if you were a therapist, and your son was a Y2K "extremist"(of course we all know that I am truly a realist...but you are hypothetically taking the perpective of my mother who thinks I am an extremist) and you had a client who was the Y2K project director for a major power company, what would you do? She does not tell me about his 'issues' or problems...nor would she EVER tell me his name. She tells me what I think any of you realistically would tell your son in her position...do I go around telling the world? Of course not...but seeing as I fest this information would be of interest to those into Y2K, I decided to post it on a board, with a fake name, using a fake Company, and on and on. I mean, lighten up for cryin' out loud!

-- Jon Burk (j_burk@hotmail.com), October 16, 1999.

No kidding,

This is mild compared to that cross dressing thingy going on a few threads up.

-- (Pollywog@thepond.com), October 16, 1999.

Billy-Boy,

See SYSOP Chuck's post on the initial thread.

It seems that this poster initially *did* post identifying information about his mother's client, then thought twice about it (after posting) and contacted the SYSOP to delete it from his post.

So....

While perhaps the mother felt she was sharing this info in 'confidence' with her son (and after her client deliberately asked her to "not tell anyone"), her son felt he had a juicy story to share. If not for the quick work of the SYSOP in deleting the information, this person probably would have easily been identified.

"Loose lips sink ships". Good advice. Even if someone thinks the person they tell has every intention of keeping the 'scoop' a secret, one can never guarantee it.

And while some feel my position on this is self-righteous, so be it. Maybe I am. I don't feel it's a quality I should be embarrassed about. I've been privy to some pretty interesting "stuff" myself during my career, but I've managed to keep this information to myself. I've always tried to think of how *I* would feel if sensitive information about me was fodder for water cooler conversations.

-- Wilferd (WilferdW@aol.com), October 16, 1999.

Jon,

Have you done the right thing? Well you might be either a liar or crazy. If we say you are not a liar: Note that patient confidentiality does not extend to the threat of harm to another. If you are right about this danger for others, it is both admissable and depending on the extent of the danger morally imperative to warn those in danger. If you are wrong about the danger then you screwed up royally. For what its worth, aside from pumping the patient for info (real, real bad form) I appreciate the heads up. Of course on the internet I don't know you from Adam.

-- PD (PaulDMaher@worldnet.att.com), October 16, 1999.

jon-

thank you for the heads up.

I don't know if it is "illegal" (mentioned in the previous thread) for an electric company to "island".

The term exists, so it must be an "option".

If I was sitting around drawing up contingency plans for an electric co., I would certainly bring up "islanding". Depending on how the situation looks at the time, it may be a viable option for them... sort of like a circuit breaker. Better to have the crew understand what will happen if they decide to "island" than to just sort of do it all of a sudden.

It is possible that the employee that you refer to was part of the contingency plan discussions and simply because they discussed this and will "plan" for it, he/she is concerned that they WILL.

of course, I don't really know the truth.

as an aside: I went to dinner with a couple that know that I am one those "Y2K kooks". they think it's quite humorous ("she" works with computers and knows that computers break all the time, so what's the big deal...)

anyways- at dinner, the husband has heard my list of stuff, argon- packed food, etc, inverter/batteries/generator....and he's introducing his wife to all the goofy stuff I've got.

After I explain how I learned to pack and store food to last, she asks me: "Do you have any weapons?"

So I tell her what I have.

"Are you going to shoot us if we come over?" she asks

what?

She has it in her head that since I have some guns, after the rollover, if they come over, I will shoot them.

It's possible that a similar sort of reasoning is involved in the employee that you describe, the option exists, therefore it will be used.

Just because a plan exists, does not necessarily mean it will be implemented.

I'm not trying to dismiss the possibility of the scenario you described, just trying to understand what MAY be really happening.

I doubt we will know much more until it actually happens.

-- plonk! (realaddress@hotmail.com), October 16, 1999.

My, my, my! What moral high ground we all assume to occupy! Examine your hearts folks - none of us walk on water and asking for further information IS definitely something you would do. Don't pretend otherwise. The post was modified and the necessary details obscured. Pretenders!

-- I'll take the low road (stuffy@ren't.we.com), October 16, 1999.

And we are to believe that wilferd has never gossiped about anyone. I believe that. NOT

-- wondering (yeahright@doubtit.com), October 17, 1999.

Hey Wilferd,

Look at it this way. If the guy is going to a shrink it is good that we have information about him and talk about him behind his back. This way he'll know that his paranoia is justified and therefore he is not going crazy.

-- @ (@@@.@), October 17, 1999.