Another Dr. Office policy question..

[Dax]

I was reading the post about the Dr. office requiring a CC on file..and it made me think of my own family dr, and the policy he put into place about a year ago.

DH and I see the same doc. When we first started going, we were in the same room, and are appoints were made one right after the other. The dr would then see us both together. The main reason behind this is because DH is not very good at remembering, or voicing what is wrong with him. Thats my job. So I would act as the person who gave the issues. This always worked well for us, and the dr said he liked seeing us at the same time. He would also play part time marriage counsler.

Well about a year or 2 ago, when they moved to bigger office space, they implemented a policy where only the patient could be seen. No "extras", unless they were a child. I tried to explain to the staff how it had always been, yet they refused. I made sure I was seen first, and voiced my displeasure to the dr. He said there was nothing he could do. This seemed weird, as it is his practice. I have even brought it up to his wife, who is office manager, yet nothing. Now DH never wants to go to the Dr we have been seeing for over 6years, because he always "forgets" something, and would rather have me around to hear whats going on.

I am at a loss. I love my dr, and do NOT want to switch, but this policy is starting to wear thin on me, and I do not know what to do? Anyone have any advice?

 

[Pop Daddy]

long post

 

[Galahad]

My guess is it is their response to HIPAA rules. May not be the right response but there a lot of hoops to jump through to be good with privacy laws.

It's interesting the different responses and policies. When DW and I each had procedures done last year that required "light" anethesia, we were required to have our spouse (or other adult) available at the end of the procedure so that the lucid one could rmember what was being said by the doc afterwards. But we had to sign off on having the other person even hear what the doc said before going in. Perhaps HIPAA would allow some arrangement like that and the doc's staff (or corporate group, if he says he has no choice) needs to be brought up to speed.

 

[crz4mm2]

If you want my opinion....
Has nothing to do with HIPPA. If you bring a person WITH you, you have already given permission for them to hear what is said.
I THINK it probably has to do more with the people that have "come along" asking for "free advise".
If the doc wasn't comfortable saying "you'll have to make an appt to be seen" he may have just decided to make it a "policy" then it isn't "his fault"....

Do you see what I mean?

I frequently have the "come alongs" ask for advise. I tell them to make an appt.

 

[MushyMushy]

I do think some offices take the Hipaa stuff a little too far. I wouldn't like it at all if a physician's office wouldn't allow another person in the room. If a person is sick, they could miss a whole lot of what the doctor is saying and it's a good idea to have someone there for an extra pair of ears.

 

[Pembo]

I'd switch doctors, yesterday. It is your choice to have a person with you.

 

[Obi-Wan Pinobi]

That doesn't make sense. It would if the doctor left one practice to join another and the new practice had that policy already in place. Did he merge practices with another doctor and this had been the other doctor's policy? Besides, what if the patient wants a relative to come back with them?

I've never had any problem going with my DW to see any of her doctors. I don't go back every time, but when she wants or needs me to I can. It may be a response to HIPAA, like Galahad said, but admittedly an extreme one. Even so, DW and I are on each other's HIPAA paperwork as the primary contact and info can be disclosed anyway.

You may have to tell them that if you aren't allowed to go back with your DH that your DH will be seeking another doctor where you would be allowed, and that you may end up changing the doctor as well if you feel comfortable with the new doctor. Be prepared to follow through on it, and be sure the doctor and the wife/office manager know exactly why. Let them know you would come back to them as long as you are allowed back with DH.

 

[Dax]

I may push the issue more. I have NEVER before been denied access to be with DH, or him with me. Like I said, we always would schedule our appoints back to back, so as to not inconvience the dr or the staff. Its not like we kept him for hours. I am on the paperwork as his primary contact as well..LOL..so I don't know if its a HIPPA thing.

The dr has not merged practices or had any changes in the last 6-7 years either, just moved offices. I never was a fan of his office staff, but he is a GREAT dr, and would hate to lose him.

 

[agnes!]

Doesn't matter if he's the greatest doctor or not...a doctor can only be as good as his staff.

The whole change sounds odd. Maybe if you told them to charge you more for being in the room ?

agnes!

 

[allison443]

Having dealt over the past few years with several elderly relatives and numerous health problems, I can't imagine what would happen if I wasn't allowed to accompany them into the doctor's office. Memory issues, nerves, etc. can prevent people from understanding the doctor's instructions, questions, etc.

OP I am surprised you doctor is going along with this. Were you kidding about the "part time marriage counselor" thing? Because if not, maybe your visits together were taking longer than you thought. Just a thought.

I hope you can get this changed.

 

[bicker]

Given how litigious people are today, I don't blame any doctor for being meticulous and over-cautious with regard to how they comply with HIPAA.

 

[Dax]

OP I am surprised you doctor is going along with this. Were you kidding about the "part time marriage counselor" thing? Because if not, maybe your visits together were taking longer than you thought. Just a thought.

I hope you can get this changed.

What I meant is he would always just ask, how we were. The main thing about it was how in our late 20's we made the decision to not have children. He would just talk it over with us. We never discussed anything major.

The dr does see a lot of elderly patients, and there have been times where he has been with a patient for well over an hour, putting all his appts for the day behind. He is not the type of "fast food dr." as I refer to them. He cares about his patients, and wants them to ask questions.

I guess I have put up with it, because its never been a big deal until recently. Most of the time, over the last year either myself or DH did not have medical benefits. Now that we both do again, its becoming a hot topic again.

Good thing the foot dr he goes to allows me to go in. DH is VERY phobic of procedures, and he is about to have his ingrown toenail removed. I need to be there to let the dr know when he is about to pass out!

 

[KandD]

Will the office let you schedule both appointments together and you have to be seen in different rooms? Or will they not even let you schedule the appointments together?

When I was at a doctor's office we had to stop letting families schedule multiple appointments at one time because if one child got sick then the whole family would cancel and we would end up with an afternoon of no shows. But from what I am understanding from your post, you are NOT scheduling them together right? They just won't allow you in the room when your husband has an appointment? That sounds very strange...I might switch doctors....

 

[Boston Tea Party]

Are you saying that the doctor won't permit you to be in the room while DH is being seen

OR

that the doctor won't see two patients in one room?

It seems to me that you could just be seen first, leave your exam room, and join DH.

 

[DawnCt1]

The physician is the "captain of the ship", and he can determine how he sees patients. I would find it extremely unusual if he wasn't involved in this decision, and I can't imagine an office manager telling a physician that "only one person is allowed in the room". Patients are often accompanied by family members. This situation is not unusual.

 

[Dax]

To further clarify..

- In the past, I made 2 seperate appts, but right after another, for say like 10a and 10:30a. They would then put us together in 1 room. Dr would see one, then we would switch out.

-I also have scheduled just 1 of us to go, the other going as basically the concerned spouse.

In both situations, I am not allowed in the room. I also have tried the PP suggestion of making 2 sep appts, then following DR into room with DH, no go.

I know the situation is weird, and I do not know why this was implemented, and I may beging to press the issue.

 

[lsyorke]

Given how litigious people are today, I don't blame any doctor for being meticulous and over-cautious with regard to how they comply with HIPAA.

This has nothing to do with HIPAA. If the wife is the "authorized person" to recieve information about her husband, then being in the room is well within the patients rights.

 

[bicker]

What proof is there that the wife is the "authorized person"? Verbal authorizations are not necessarily reliable protection against complaints.

 

[lsyorke]

All doctors offices require a "emergency contact" person who information can be released to. I would assume that in this case that person is his wife.

 

[bicker]

I have seen nothing in HIPAA that says that regular emergency contact designation satisfies the privacy requirements for doctor-patient discussions.