Free New York Statues Discussed In The Case Essay Example

Question Two: Caselnova vs. State Department of Health

The case was decided by the Appellate Division of the New York Supreme Court; the main role of the Appellate Division Court of New York is to hear cases from other lower Appellate courts i.e. family courts, surrogate courts, Court of Claims as well as County Courts.
The case was taken only through one level of Court, which was the Appellate Division Court of New York. However, the initial decision was made by the State Board for Professional Medical Conduct. This decision was appealed, hence leading to ultimate decision-making by the Appellate Division Court of New York (www4.law.cornell.edu).

Public Health Law Section 230 and Education Law section 6530
Persons that Should be appointed in the State Board for Professional Misconduct
The State Board for Professional Medical Misconduct is composed of physicians, who are appointed by the commissioner. It is also composed of laymen, with no medical expertise appointed by the commissioner and approved by the governor. All these members have a term of three years.

Conditions for Probation imposed on the Doctor by State Board for Professional Medical Conduct

The Board suspended the Doctor’s operational license for a period of two years. He was also prohibited from providing written prescription for controlled substances for clients for a period of two years. He was also order to continue with medical education, specifically on prescription of controlled drugs while on probation.

Court’s Decision on the Condition

The Court found that some of the conditions that were imposed on the Petitioner by the State Board for Professional Medical Conduct were permitted while some were not. To begin with, the petitioner claimed that he was not provided with a notice indicating that his competency was to be evaluated by the hearing committee. The Court acknowledged that the petitioner has a right of notice regarding charges imposed on him. However, this appeal was rejected. The Petitioner also base his appeal of the fact that the decision made by the hearing committee outweighed the evidence provided against him; this was not permitted according to the court, however, since the petitioner did not appeal to the hearing committee on this matter, the issue was rejected (www4.law.cornell.edu). Other decisions that were not permitted according to the court are; reviewing the petitioner’s medical records, increased medical malpractice and being monitored. The court rejected these penalties on the basis that they are not listed within section 230 of Public Health Law (www4.law.cornell.edu).

Question Five: Discussing Five Choices

Legal Processes that have to be Reviewed
Before engaging in the expansion project, the Church should identify or determine whether they have a document/license or title deed indicating that they own the church building. Additionally, they may be required to produce documents or licenses indicating that the targeted space for expansion is owned by the church. The next procedure involves signing a contract with a contractor; the contractor has to be licensed by the relevant state authorities on respective licensing departments. It is important to acknowledge that the requirements for licensing among contractors may various from one state to another. Consequently, the church will be required to produce an environmental impact assessment report from an accredited and qualified impact assessment agency indicating challenges that may arise during the expansion process and mitigation strategies that have been put in place (Glasson, Riki & Andrew, 11). On one of the challenges that might be experienced in this process is high cost associated with hiring external experts to perform certain activities such as: Environmental Impact assessment and external legal officers to provide legal guidance. Another challenge that may be encountered in the process is conflict of interest between local communities, church member who are against the expansion, probably as a result of perceived consequences. Additionally, certain aspects of the expansion may not be permitted by relevant laws; this might hinder an effective implementation of the expansion process.
D. Enforcement Agency against those who violate Healthcare Laws and the Role of the Agency
The Enforcement Agency that punishes those who violate health laws in the United States is the Department of Health and Human Services (Chatterjee, 5). The Department of Health and Human Services is considered one of the most pertinent Federal Agencies in the United States of America. It is charged with a principal responsibility of protection the lives of the entire American population through health protection as well as the provision of essential human services.
One of the laws that are overseen by this agency is the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (HIPAA). Health and Insurance Portability and Accountability Act was implemented with a principal purpose of enhancing efforts of the United States population in protecting health insurance, enhancing health information security, confidentiality as well as integrity (Chatterjee, 6). The role of the Department of Health and Human Services in regard to this act is to oversee its implementation and take punitive actions against violators.

E.One Law that Regulates Protection of Privacy of Medical Information

As aforementioned, the Health Insurance and Portability Act of 1996 is the law that guides the protection of privacy in regard to medical information. It was implemented by the Federal Government with a main objective of ensuring that the United States population has the capacity to keep their health insurances. Additionally, HIPPA provides certain guidelines in relation to protection of medical data security, confidentiality of medical information as well as providing assistance to the medical industry of the United States to control and regulate associated medical costs.
It is the Portability aspect of this law that allows individuals within the United States to keep their health insurances as they move from one job to another. This prevents challenges associated with lapses in coverage. Moreover, the portability aspect of HIPAA restricts health care service providers as well as health insurance agencies to discriminate certain members of the United States population when allocating health insurances on the basis of pre-existing conditions. The Agency that oversees the regulation of this law is the US Department of Health and Human Services. It imposes fines and other punitive measures on violators. The role of the US Department of Health and Human Services as mentioned earlier on is to protect the lives of the entire US population through protection of health and provision of essential human services. Considering the fact that HIPAA is act within the health sector, its implementation is under the jurisdiction of the US HHS. The difference between the regulation and the statute occurs in the sense that the US Department of Human and Health is responsible for overseeing the implementation of the statute and determination of areas of improvement, while the statute basically stipulates guidelines that should be followed by healthcare practitioners to enhance protection of health information.

Criminal Penalties on Healthcare Workers

One of the criminal penalties that can be levied on a healthcare worker is imposing fines on certain healthcare offenses for instance: Violating the requirements of the Health Insurance and Portability Act may lead to a penalty of fines ranging from $50,000 to $1.5 million (Chatterjee, 7). These fines depend on the magnitude of the offense, which is usually determined by the Department of Health and Human Services as well as other relevant organs.
Additionally, healthcare workers may also be served with prison sentences for a specific period of time for having violated certain healthcare issues for instance: Engaging in healthcare Fraud may subject a healthcare worker to a prison sentence of between 5 and 20 years. This is mainly caused by fraud made in the context of making false statement in regard to certain aspects of the Medicare or the Medicaid (Miller, 8).
In the case of Scooter Store, the penalties that may be levied on it if found guilty are: Serving prison sentences; they can also be order to pay certain amounts of fines ranging between $250,000 and $500,000. On the other hand, they may be served with restitution notice; this basically involves making certain payments to the aggrieved parties for having fraudulently obtains certain benefits on their behalf. Scooter and Store may also be served with probation; this involves limiting certain aspects of their freedom. Yes. Individuals within Scooter and Store could go to jail if found guilty; this is a criminal offense and is subject to four main types of penalties; fines, probation, prison and restitution (Miller, 12). However, this would depend on the decision made by the relevant court.

Roles and Responsibilities of a Governing Board of Healthcare Agency

The governing board of a healthcare agency plays various roles and responsibilities; one of these roles is to establish various policies that guide healthcare services. Additionally, the board has the responsibility of overseeing the implementation of certain health care practices, standards as well as rules and regulations. Another important role of the board is to enforce the implementation of certain healthcare policies. This is mainly performed through implementation of certain punitive actives against violators. On the other hand, governing board of healthcare agencies may be provided with the authority to assess and evaluate certain healthcare practices with an intention of identifying necessary area of corrections.
There are three levels of government that regulate the activities of a Governing Board of a Healthcare Agency, these levels are: The Federal Government, Department of Health or Ministry of Health and Government Courts. The Federal government is responsible for providing financial resources to the Department of Health, which is then channeled to support activities of the Board. In relation to the department of Health, its main responsibility involves appointing Board Members, providing financial and technical assistance to the Board and directing the board on national critical health issues. Consequently, government courts have the responsibility enforcing laws implemented to regulate activities of the board; this is mainly performed through making decisions in relation to conflicts that may occur when healthcare laws are violated.

Work Cited

Chatterjee, Sharmila. "Strengthening of the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA)-its Role in Public Health." Journal of Theory and Practice of Dental Public Health 1.1 (2013).
Glasson, John, Riki Therivel, and Andrew Chadwick. INTRO TO ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSES. Routledge, 2013.
Miller, Ayla R. Examining the role of the affordable care act on medicare fraud. Diss. UTICA
"IN THE MATTER OF VITO E. CASELNOVA, RESPONDENT, V. NEW YORK STATE DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, APPELLANT." LII / Legal Information Institute. N.p., n.d. Web. 16 Apr. 2015. <http://www4.law.cornell.edu/nyctap/I98_0043.htm>.