Archive for 2024

Court Issues Ruling in Abortion Prosecution Lawsuits

Court Issues Ruling in Abortion Prosecution Lawsuits

In the latest fallout from the US Supreme Court Dobbs decision, on Monday, May 6, 2024, Judge Myron Thompson of the US District Court for the Middle District of Alabama issued an order granting in part and denying in part Alabama Attorney General Steve Marshall’s Motion to Dismiss two federal court actions alleging violations of the constitutional rights of the plaintiffs, their staff, and their clients. The suits were filed after Marshall publicly stated an intent to prosecute under a criminal conspiracy statute enacted in 1896 any individuals or entities who transport or otherwise provide aid to Alabama women seeking to obtain abortions in states where abortion is legal. Three separate plaintiffs brought suit in two cases, collectively alleging violations of the First Amendment, the right to travel between states, the jurisdictional authority of a state, the overbreadth doctrine, and the right to fair notice for due process.

The Attorney General’s Motion to Dismiss was primarily based on the argument that the plaintiffs in all three cases lacked standing to bring the actions themselves, and where applicable, lacked standing to bring actions on behalf of their staff or clients. The Court reserved judgment on whether the constitutional right to travel applied to the one non-individual plaintiff, but otherwise sided with the plaintiffs on the standing issue.

Of the constitutional claims presented, the Court granted the Motion to Dismiss as to two of them. One of the plaintiffs claimed that the interpretation of the state conspiracy statute on which the Attorney General relied for the authority to prosecute is unconstitutionally overbroad, but offered no facts in support of that assertion, and therefore, that claim was dismissed. Similarly, a plaintiff’s fair warning – violation of due process claim was dismissed as premature because there has not yet been a prosecution under the law. For all of the other pending constitutional claims, the Court either denied the Motion to Dismiss or reserved judgment, which served as a denial in effect. Because only two constitutional theories were dismissed, the claims are still pending in federal court, along with a Motion for Summary Judgment filed by the Plaintiffs. Although the cases await final resolution, the Court’s partial denial of the Attorney General’s Motion to Dismiss and accompanying opinion dealt a substantial blow to the constitutionality of prosecution of individuals who aid others to get legal abortions outside of Alabama.

Posted in: Legal Watch

Leave a Comment (0) →

Here’s How Alabamians Can Fight Insurance Red Tape That Delays Medical Care

Here’s How Alabamians Can Fight Insurance Red Tape That Delays Medical Care

Alabama doctors and patients frustrated with delays in care caused by insurance companies’ prior authorization process now have a new way to share their stories and promote change.

A new online platform — www.ALFixPriorAuth.com — invites Alabamians to share their experiences with prior authorization problems. The website and the initiative behind it to encourage faster insurance approvals for medical care was started by doctors with the Medical Association of the State of Alabama.

Doctors say delays caused by prior authorizations can have dangerous impacts on their patients’ health.

>>>Watch this video: Doctors Discuss the Burdens of Prior Authorization<<<

“With prior authorizations, we definitely see a delay in patient care,” said Dr. Tonya Bradley, a physician in Auburn. “I see delays in patients getting chemo, I see delays in patients getting tests they need to diagnose problems that can be very urgent.”

What is Prior Authorization?
Before your doctor provides a treatment, your insurance requires them to prove you need it. Decades ago, prior authorization was used sparingly and typically only to make sure some expensive treatments were absolutely necessary.

But today, even routine medical care requires insurance approval. Denials mean patients and doctors must spend time fighting insurance companies for care.

Takes Time Away From ‘What Really Matters’
When doctors have to spend time arguing with insurance companies over prior authorizations, it means there’s less time for doctors to spend with their patients – their number one priority.

“The bureaucracy. The paperwork. The institutional inertia. The list goes on and on, and it makes it very difficult for us to do what really matters, which is take great care of our patients,” said Dr. George Koulianos of Mobile.

What Alabamians Think
A survey of Alabama doctors found that 76 percent said the time they spend on prior authorizations means they see fewer patients in a day. One-third of doctors said they and their staff spend nearly an entire workday each week filling out prior authorization paperwork, following up with phone calls and fighting denials.

A separate survey of 500 Alabamians showed that 80 percent agree with the statement that “doctors in Alabama are working to spend more time with patients, so that patients and doctors have the time together to make the best health care decisions.”

Dr. Hernando Carter said being able to spend more time with patients rather than prior authorizations results in better health care.

“If you can spend the time to explain to your patient why you’re recommending a test or why you’re recommending a treatment and be able to answer all the questions they have and assuage any concerns or apprehensions they have, then that directly affects how well they do. It directly affects whether they get better or not,” the Birmingham physician said. “So, we abhor anything that interferes or cuts into that time that we have to do that with our patients.”

“We need to have the ability to take care of our patients in an efficient manner, expedite the care and not go through all the red tape,” said Dr. William Admire of Mobile. “When we slow down the progress of patients’ recovery, no one wins.”

Steps to Fix Prior Authorization
Physicians with the Medical Association have begun conversations with the health insurance community to push for changes. Stories submitted through www.ALFixPriorAuth.com will help support efforts to fix prior authorization in Alabama.

Among the changes doctors want to see are an end to repeat prior authorizations for patients with chronic conditions and faster response times from insurers.

Posted in: Advocacy

Leave a Comment (0) →

Tracking A Patient’s Every Move: HIPAA Compliance Risk

Tracking A Patient’s Every Move: HIPAA Compliance Risk

By: Kelli Fleming with Burr & Forman LLP

The Health and Human Services Office for Civil Rights (”OCR”) recently published a guidance bulletin addressing the use of online tracking technologies by entities covered by HIPAA, including but not limited physician practices. 

A tracking technology is used to collect information about how online users interact with websites or mobile applications. For example, have you ever wondered why after you search for a product on google, it automatically appears as an ad in your social media for the next few days? That is the result of a form of tracking technology. 

When used by healthcare providers, the information that is collected by way of a tracking technology may be considered protected health information (“PHI”) covered by HIPAA. If a healthcare provider utilizes a tracking technology vendor to gather and analyze information, including information about patients, the provider must ensure that the release of the information to the vendor is compliant with HIPAA and is not an impermissible use or disclosure. 

In the recent bulletin, OCR clarified that individually identifiable information “collected on a regulated entity’s website or mobile app generally is PHI, even if the individual does not have an existing relationship with the regulated entity and even if the [information] does not include specific treatment or billing information like dates and types of healthcare services.” 

Covered entities that engage a user-authenticated webpage (i.e., a website that requires a log-in) should only allow tracking technologies to use and disclose information in compliance with HIPAA, including in a secure manner. In order to comply with HIPAA, the covered entity must either enter in a Business Associate Agreement (“BAA”) with the vendor, or obtain patient authorization for such use and/or disclosure. Disclosing PHI to tracking technology vendors based solely on informing individuals of such use in the website’s privacy policy or terms of use is not sufficient, nor is merely accepting or rejecting cookie use. There must be either a valid, HIPAA compliant patient authorization or a BAA, and the use and/or disclosure must be permissible under HIPAA. For example, a disclosure to a tracking vendor for marketing purposes, without an authorization, would be impermissible. 

Covered entities using a website that is not user-authenticated (i.e., does not require a log-in) need to determine if any of the information obtained by the tracking vendor would be individually identifiable and constitute PHI. If so, a BAA and compliance with HIPAA would be required. However, the determination as to whether or not PHI is being collected by the vendor is not always clear and may not necessarily be known by the provider. OCR provides the example that if a student is writing a term paper regarding oncology services and visits a hospital’s oncology services webpage, information tracked in connection with that website visit would not be considered PHI. However, if a patient were looking at the same page regarding oncology services to see a second opinion on treatment options for a brain tumor, information tracked in connection with that website visit would be considered PHI. It would be difficult, if not impossible, for providers to determine the purpose of the visit.

Thus, based on the recent OCR guidance, if a covered entity is utilizing tracking technologies on its websites, in my opinion, the provider should always act as if PHI is being tracked and enter into a BAA with the vendor and ensure the use/disclosure is appropriate under HIPAA.

Kelli Fleming is a Partner at Burr & Forman LLP practicing exclusively in the Healthcare Practice Group. Kelli may be reached at (205) 458-5429 or kfleming@burr.com.

Posted in: HIPAA, Legal Watch, Technology

Leave a Comment (0) →

Medical Association Unveils ‘Your Care is at Our Core,’ Emphasizing Personal Connection in Health Care

Medical Association Unveils ‘Your Care is at Our Core,’ Emphasizing Personal Connection in Health Care

83% of Alabamians Agree: Doctor-Patient Relationship is ‘Central’ to Health

A strong bond between doctors and patients leads to better health care, say Alabama doctors. A new awareness campaign launched by the Medical Association of the State of Alabama called “Your Care is at Our Core” reinforces this important message.

A doctor-patient relationship based on mutual trust allows doctors to help patients navigate what can be complex health challenges. It is a responsibility doctors say they don’t take lightly.

“From the moment that you begin training to become a doctor, it’s made very clear and apparent to you that people are going to place their trust in you. They’re placing their lives in your hands so you have to take that very seriously,” said Dr. Hernando Carter, a doctor of internal medicine in Birmingham. “It has to be the most important thing to you.”

Building Trust
Trust is essential because patients are more inclined to share crucial information about their health concerns and personal circumstances when they feel a genuine connection with their doctor.

This honest exchange of information enables doctors to make informed decisions, tailor treatment plans and provide care that aligns with each patient’s unique needs and preferences.

A Collaborative Approach to Wellness
Moreover, a strong doctor-patient relationship fosters a supportive environment where patients feel empowered and engaged in their healthcare journey. When patients feel heard and valued, they are more likely to adhere to treatment regimens, follow medical advice and actively participate in the shared decision-making process.

“I tell my patients all the time that I can’t make you well on my own. It’s a team effort, something that we have to work together on and I think that resonates well with patients,” said Dr. Brittney Anderson, a family physician in Demopolis.

‘Be a Good Listener’

Physicians recognize that effective communication and empathy are vital in fostering positive patient outcomes. By building rapport and understanding their patients’ concerns, doctors deliver patient-centered care and uphold the sanctity of the doctor-patient relationship as a cornerstone of healthcare excellence.

“One of the most important things when I train medical students and residents is I teach them to sit down with the patient,” said Dr. William Admire, a doctor of internal medicine in Mobile. “The most important thing about being a doctor is to be a good listener, show respect, show empathy, compassion.”

Statewide Consensus
According to a statewide survey conducted in March on behalf of the Medical Association, 83 percent of Alabamians agree “the doctor-patient relationship is central to health care.” The poll also showed that 83 percent agree with the statement: “It is crucial for physicians to be involved in my care so that I have the best outcomes.”

To watch a video of Alabama physicians discussing why they view the doctor-patient
relationship as sacred, click here.

To view the “Your Care is at Our Core” video message, click here.

Posted in: Advocacy, Health, Official Statement

Leave a Comment (0) →

Gov. Ivey Declares March 30 “Doctors Day” in Alabama, Doctors Share Stories of Why They Became Physicians

Gov. Ivey Declares March 30 “Doctors Day” in Alabama, Doctors Share Stories of Why They Became Physicians

Gov. Kay Ivey has proclaimed March 30 as “Doctors Day” in Alabama and doctors are celebrating the occasion by sharing personal stories about why they chose medicine for their profession.

In a video released by the Medical Association of the State of Alabama, several doctors say as they were growing up it was their own doctors who inspired them.

Dr. Hernando Carter, a doctor of internal medicine in Birmingham: “I was a preemie when I was born and spent a lot of time at the doctor with asthma and bronchitis. I know when I went to the doctor she would give me a breathing treatment, help me feel better and she’d give me a lollipop. So when I was 4 years old I said, ‘That’s a cool job. You get to help people feel better and give them candy’…I give my patients a lollipop at the end of every visit just as kind of an homage to her.”

Dr. Tonya Bradley, a primary care doctor in Auburn: “I grew up in a rural area of Alabama where our family doctor is the person who took care of us. When I was around five my dad was diagnosed with cancer and spent a whole summer in the hospital and I was there a lot, and I was really just touched by the physicians and the way they cared for our family.”

Dr. Brittney Anderson, a family medicine physician in Demopolis: “My parents say that I’ve been saying I wanted to be a doctor since I was six years old and I never changed my mind…Really the desire to help people and to make people feel well and be well is at the core of why I practice medicine and I think why I’ve always wanted to practice medicine.”

For these and other Alabama physicians, caring for patients is at their core. Physicians entered the practice of medicine to care for patients, to be their patients’ strongest ally, and to give personal attention to those they are honored to treat. 

Doctors Day is observed annually as a time to honor and recognize the physicians who care for Alabamians every day of the year.

Gov. Ivey’s proclamation notes that about 17,000 physicians are licensed to practice medicine in the state, and “those who have chosen the medical profession serve their communities with reverence for human life and individual dignity.” 

To read the Governor’s proclamation, click here.

To watch the video, click here.

Posted in: Members, Official Statement

Leave a Comment (0) →

What’s Behind the Curtain? Federal Agencies Seek Transparency Regarding Health Provider Ownership

What’s Behind the Curtain? Federal Agencies Seek Transparency Regarding Health Provider Ownership

By: Jessie L. Bekker, Burr & Forman LLP

Market analysts reported a decline in mergers & acquisitions in the health care industry in
2023 as compared to pre-pandemic trends—a perhaps unsurprising development amid 7% or
higher interest rates. The federal government, however, is now taking notice of who’s behind the
ongoing trend toward health care consolidation.

On March 5, three federal departments—the Department of Justice (DOJ), Department of
Health and Human Services (HHS), and Federal Trade Commission (FTC)—published a request
for information seeking public input into the effects private equity transactions have on patients,
payers and providers, a request driven by a concern “that some transactions may generate profits
for those firms at the expense of patients’ health, workers’ safety, quality of care, and affordable
health care for patients and taxpayers.”

The DOJ/HHS/FTC request for information is just the latest in a line of federal inquiries
into the ownership and control of providers and suppliers across the health care industry. The
Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) published a request for information in January
related to Medicare Advantage data, including data regarding “the impact of mergers and
acquisitions” and “the effects of vertical integration.” In December, President Joe Biden
announced the publication of ownership information regarding Medicare-enrolled federally
qualified health centers and rural health clinics. November brought new requirements regarding
nursing home ownership and control reporting through a new final rule published by CMS.
And of course, the Corporate Transparency Act, which took effect on January 1, 2024,
requires that nearly all business entities within and outside of the health care industry report their
ownership and control interests to the Department of Treasury’s Financial Crimes Enforcement
Network, a requirement that reflects the agency’s effort to track down fraudulent money
laundering activity.

Despite plateauing merger and acquisition activity in 2023, analysts predict 2024 could
be the year of physician practice acquisitions and health system consolidation. Reports indicate
that physician specialties including dermatology, cardiology, orthopedics and plastic surgery
may see an increase in investor interest. Others predict investor interest in behavioral health
providers. In any event, it’s unlikely the federal government’s interest in merger & acquisition
activity will wane. In its request for information, the DOJ, HHS and FTC requests public input
related to both direct acquisitions by private equity funds and “transactions structured to
facilitate private equity investment, circumventing applicable corporate practice of medicine
restrictions.” The agencies’ request also seeks information regarding vertical integration, where a
health system buys up health providers across the care continuum, from ambulatory surgery
centers, to nursing facilities.

The agencies are not just interested in who is behind the transaction, but how it affects
patients, payers, providers and employers on a variety of metrics including the cost and quality
of care, reimbursement rates, provider compensation models and changes in facility choice.

The DOJ/HHS/FTC request for information is open to public comment until May 6, 2024. Comments can be submitted at https://www.regulations.gov/docket/FTC-2024-0022.

While the requests from CMS and the DOJ, HHS and FTC don’t create affirmative
requirements of providers today, both the Corporate Transparency Act and CMS’ latest final rule
on nursing home ownership and control reporting generate new reporting obligations.

The Corporate Transparency Act will require most physician practices existing as of
January 1, 2024 to report certain information to the federal government by the end of the year,
including reporting of a practice’s ownership interests and the individuals who control the
entity’s decision-making. Among other required reports, the Financial Crimes Enforcement
Network, or FinCEN, seeks information regarding an entity’s beneficial owners—those who own
or control at least 25% of ownership interests of a reporting company, and those who exercise
“substantial control” over a reporting company. Entities that form in 2024 will be required to
make reports to FinCEN within ninety (90) days of formation. Practice managers and administers
are encouraged to seek counsel from their accountants and attorneys regarding the new reporting
requirements under the Corporate Transparency Act. FinCEN’s Small Entity Compliance
Guidance, which details the reporting requirements, can be found at
https://www.fincen.gov/boi/small-entity-compliance-guide.

For nursing facilities, new ownership and control reporting requirements will be reported
on a revised version of the Form CMS-855A, the Medicare enrollment application for
institutional providers, which CMS has yet to publish. The revised form is expected to reflect the
final rule’s new mandated reporting requirements. Skilled nursing facilities (SNF) and Medicaid-
enrolled nursing facilities should expect to report information regarding their governing bodies,
officers, directors and managing employees, including SNF medical directors and administrators.
The new rule also requires reporting of “additional disclosable parties,” including, but not
limited to, people and entities who: exercise financial control over the facility; lease or sublease
real property to the facility; and provide management, administrative, clinical consulting and
financial or accounting services to the facility. Facilities should discuss the new requirements,
including the timing of the report, with their advisors.

Jessie L. Bekker is an attorney at Burr & Forman LLP practicing exclusively in the firm’s
healthcare practice group. Jessie can be reached at jbekker@burr.com or (205) 458-5275.

Posted in: Legal Watch, MVP

Leave a Comment (0) →

Statement by the Medical Association of Alabama on the Recent Alabama Supreme Court Ruling on the Legal Status of Embryos

Statement by the Medical Association of Alabama on the Recent Alabama Supreme Court Ruling on the Legal Status of Embryos

The Medical Association of the State of Alabama expresses concern over the recent Alabama Supreme Court decision regarding the legal status of embryos, as it relates to In-Vitro Fertilization (IVF) procedures that may result in a woman becoming pregnant. 

The significance of this decision impacts all Alabamians and will likely lead to fewer babies—children, grandchildren, nieces, nephews, and cousins—as fertility options become limited for those who want to have a family.

In addition, the ruling has already forced UAB, the largest healthcare system in the State of Alabama, to stop providing IVF services to Alabama couples. Others will likely do the same, leaving little to no alternatives for reproductive assistance. IVF is oftentimes the only option for couples wanting to conceive.

In closing, we ask that the Alabama Supreme Court stay or revisit their ruling to ensure continued access to IVF care in Alabama.

Posted in: Legal Watch, Official Statement

Leave a Comment (0) →

OCR Issues Guidance on Visitation Discrimination
in Hospitals and Long Term Care Facilities

OCR Issues Guidance on Visitation Discrimination<br>in Hospitals and Long Term Care Facilities

By: Angie C. Smith, Burr & Forman LLP

Visitation in long-term care facilities and hospitals received a lot of attention during COVID
because of facility closures that led to limited visitation, and it is now a topic of interest for the
Office of Civil Rights (OCR) due to discrimination concerns. On January 25, 2024, OCR issued
guidance to hospitals and long-term care facilities to clarify obligations of those providers to
ensure religious non-discrimination for patient visitation.

Under federal law, hospitals, long-term care facilities, and critical access hospitals are prohibited
from restricting, denying or in any way limiting visitation to patients on the basis of race, color,
national origin, religion, sex, gender identity, sexual orientation, or disability. Additionally,
provisions of the Affordable Care Act and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act prohibit any
type of discrimination in certain federally funded programs and activities. In order to be in
compliance, providers are required to have policies and procedures to prohibit discrimination. In
fact, when becoming a Medicare provider, healthcare providers certify to the federal
government that they are in compliance with these non-discrimination laws.
Although the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) is the agency that oversees
compliance with the regulations cited above, CMS has delegated its authority to enforce the
regulations pertaining to discrimination in visitation to OCR. Following this delegation, OCR
issued a set of frequently asked questions (FAQs) to serve as guidance for hospitals and long-term care facilities. Additionally, OCR held a call with stakeholders on February 6, 2023, to
further discuss its guidance. Below are the key topics covered by OCR.

  1. What constitutes visitation?
    The FAQ states that patients and residents have the right to receive visitors of
    their choosing, but it also noted that patients and residents can withdraw or deny
    consent to any visitor. A visitor includes, but is not limited to, a spouse or
    domestic partner, same-sex spouse or domestic partner, another family member or
    friend, and clergy minister or other faith leader.
    The guidance also reminds providers of their obligations to allow individuals with
    disabilities access to support persons, which is separate and apart from an
    individual’s right to visitors.
  2. Which facilities are covered by the visitation requirements?
    The guidance specifically references the regulations pertaining to hospitals,
    including critical access hospitals, and long-term care facilities, but it also
    referenced federal non-discrimination laws that apply to all entities receiving
    federal funding. Those laws prohibit entities receiving federal assistance from
    excluding an individual from participating in, denying an individual the benefits
    of, or otherwise discriminating against an individual in the entity’s programs and
    activities. Therefore, even those providers who may not be covered by the
    visitation requirements should review the guidance.
  3. Which patients are covered by these rights?
    Patients and residents protected by the visitation rights are not limited to Medicare
    and Medicaid beneficiaries. All patients or residents receiving services from
    Medicare and Medicaid-certified facilities are covered by this guidance, and the
    right to visitation and non-discrimination applies to all patients and residents,
    regardless of whether their hospitalization or residency is being paid for by
    Medicare or Medicaid.
  4. What are the notification obligations of the facilities?
    Hospitals and long-term care facilities are required to inform patients and
    residents of their visitation rights, which should include any information related to
    clinical limitations or restrictions on such visitation. These providers must also
    have written policies and procedures related to visitation that include any
    clinically necessary or reasonable restriction or limitation that the provider may
    need to place on the visitation rights of a patient and the reasons that would
    support clinical restrictions or limitations.
    As mentioned above, OCR recognizes that there may be clinical reasons that
    visitation with a patient must be restricted or limited, and OCR’s FAQs make it
    clear that any such restriction or limitation must be “clinically necessary” or
    “otherwise reasonable.” Examples provided were limiting visitation hours or the
    number of visitors at a time. However, it is important that any type of limitation
    or restriction be objective and not based on any stereotype or assumption. It
    should also be clearly outlined in the facility’s policies related to visitation.
    OCR states in the FAQs that a provider has a responsibility to provide auxiliary
    aids and services to individuals with a disability in order to provide equal
    opportunity to participate or benefit from the services provided, which would
    include the ability to have visitation. According to the FAQs, a policy that only
    allows for video remote interpretation instead of in-person interpreter “may
    violate” certain non-discrimination laws, if an in-person interpreter or reader is
    necessary for effective communication.
  5. What might constitute a discriminatory denial of visitation?
    If a policy or procedure subjects certain classes of visitors to additional screening
    or if it prohibits certain classes of visitors and not others on the basis of race,
    color, national origin, religion, sex, gender identity, sexual orientation, or
    disability. Examples given were as follows:
    1. Facility prevented family member from bringing patients kosher food or
      halal food to meet the patient’s religious dietary restrictions while
      allowing other visitors to bring non-religious food items to patients.
    2. Members of certain religious groups subjected to more rigorous screening
      or denied visitation.
    3. Policies that would prohibit clergy or religious leaders from meeting with the patient.
  1. Does a facility’s chaplain program affect the right to visitation by other faith
    leaders?
    Even if the facility has a chaplaincy program, it must still allow other types of religious or faith leaders to visit patients, if the patient requests such visitation. Likewise, a facility must abide by a patient’s choice to deny visitation to clergy or religious leaders.

Conclusion/Takeway
Typically, when OCR issues guidance on a particular topic, we see corresponding scrutiny from
regulators and government enforcement agencies. Therefore, providers should take this
opportunity to review its visitation policies for compliance with the guidance and ensure staff are
educated on those policies.

OCR’s FAQs can be found here.
https://www.hhs.gov/civil-rights/for-individuals/special-topics/emergency-preparedness/faqs- patient-visitation/index.html?cm_ven=ExactTarget&cm_cat=HHS+Office+for+Civil+Rights+Releases+ Visitation+Guidance+Resources&cm_pla=Mark%27s+Memos+2024+Marketing+List&cm_ite= FAQ+on+Patient+Visitation+at+Certain+Federally+Funded+Entities+and+Facilities%e2%80%8 b&cm_lm=1612414245&cm_ainfo=&&&&&


Angie Smith is a Partner at Burr & Forman LLP practicing exclusively in the Healthcare
Practice Group. Kelli may be reached at (205) 458-5209 or acsmith@burr.com.

Posted in: Legal Watch

Leave a Comment (0) →

Dr. Regina Benjamin: A Trailblazer in Medicine Honored with the Samuel Buford Word Award

Dr. Regina Benjamin: A Trailblazer in Medicine Honored with the Samuel Buford Word Award

In the realm of healthcare, the name Dr. Regina Benjamin resonates as a beacon of inspiration and change. As the first African American President of the Medical Association of the State of Alabama and the 18th Surgeon General of the United States, Dr. Benjamin’s illustrious career is marked by a profound commitment to service, advocacy, and addressing healthcare disparities. This year, she is set to be presented with the esteemed Samuel Buford Word Award at the Medical Association’s Annual Meeting.

Trailblazing Leadership

Dr. Regina Benjamin’s journey to becoming a trailblazer in the medical field began in Mobile, Alabama, where she was raised in an environment that valued community service and compassion. Her early exposure to the healthcare profession, through the stories of her grandfather’s dedicated service as a country doctor, ignited a passion that would shape her illustrious career.

After earning her medical degree from the University of Alabama at Birmingham, Dr. Benjamin returned to her hometown, establishing a clinic that catered to the needs of underserved communities. Her dedication to addressing healthcare disparities at the grassroots level earned her widespread recognition and paved the way for her ascent into leadership roles.

Surgeon General of the United States

In 2009, Dr. Regina Benjamin made history as the 18th Surgeon General of the United States, breaking barriers as the first African American woman to hold this prestigious position. During her tenure, Dr. Benjamin focused not only on traditional public health issues but also on the social determinants of health. Recognizing that health outcomes are influenced by factors beyond clinical care, she advocated for holistic approaches that addressed the root causes of disparities, including poverty, education, and access to essential resources.

Her leadership in the face of challenges, such as the H1N1 pandemic and the Deepwater Horizon oil spill, showcased her resilience and commitment to public health. Dr. Benjamin’s tenure as Surgeon General left an indelible mark, emphasizing the importance of preventive care, health promotion, and community engagement.

Samuel Buford Word Award: A Legacy of Service

This year, Dr. Regina Benjamin will be honored with the Samuel Buford Word Award at the Medical Association’s Annual Meeting. Established in 1971, the award is named in memory of Samuel Buford Word, M.D., a distinguished physician and former president of the Medical Association of the State of Alabama. The award recognizes individuals who have demonstrated exceptional service to humanity beyond the typical scope of medical practice, often at personal sacrifice.

As the highest honor presented by the Medical Association, the Word Award symbolizes a commitment to the values upheld by its namesake. Dr. Benjamin’s receipt of this award not only acknowledges her outstanding achievements in medicine but also underscores her profound dedication to service and the betterment of human health.

A Legacy of Service and Inspiration

Dr. Regina Benjamin’s journey from a community clinic in Mobile to the highest echelons of medical leadership is a testament to her unwavering commitment to service and advocacy. Her groundbreaking achievements have not only paved the way for future generations but have also significantly impacted the trajectory of healthcare in the United States.

As she prepares to receive the Samuel Buford Word Award, Dr. Benjamin’s legacy serves as a reminder that true leadership in medicine extends beyond clinical expertise—it encompasses a passion for equity, a commitment to service, and a tireless pursuit of a healthier and more just society. In honoring Dr. Regina Benjamin, the Medical Association celebrates not only an individual but a legacy that continues to inspire and shape the future of healthcare.

Posted in: Education, Health, Uncategorized

Leave a Comment (0) →

Cyber-attacks on the Rise (Once Again…)

Cyber-attacks on the Rise (Once Again…)

By: Kelli C. Fleming, Esq., Burr & Forman

Cyber-attacks within the healthcare industry are continuing to rise, despite increased awareness, security measures, and training. The attacks are not only becoming more far-reaching, with each attack impacting more and more patient data, but are also more prevalent as well. Threat actors do not discriminate against victims, as we are seeing reports of security breaches against physician practices, rural hospitals, large hospital chains, as well as their business associate vendors and contractors.

At the time of drafting this article, we are only ten days into 2024, and in 2024 thus far, five breach reports have been published by the Office for Civil Rights (“OCR”) for incidents involving more than 500 individuals. The total number of individuals impacted as a result of those five instances is over 585,000. Of those five reports, four of them deal with hacking/IT incidents on a network server. Of the entities reporting, one is a health plan, two are healthcare providers (hospital and long-term care provider), and two are business associates. 

Partly as a result of this rise in cyberattacks against the healthcare industry, the Department of Health and Human Services (“HHS”) recently announced plans to increase federal funding to assist providers with training and implementing cyber-security protections. The plans also include increased fines for facilities that do not have adequate cyber-security measures in place. While the plans are in the early stages, and require additional funding and coordination among government entities, it is encouraging to see the government recognize that additional assistance is needed by the healthcare industry to thwart attacks. Providers are encouraged to monitor any guidance and assistance issued by HHS in this regard. 

In addition, OCR publishes cyber-security guidance as well as a cyber-security quarterly newsletter to help HIPAA-covered entities, including providers, to remain in compliance. The guidance and the quarterly newsletters contain helpful tips on ways to reduce the risk of a security breach. The guidance and newsletters are available at https://www.hhs.gov/hipaa/for-professionals/security/guidance/cybersecurity/index.html. Providers are encouraged to review this guidance for helpful information on measures they can implement to reduce the risk of a cyber-attack. 

Kelli Fleming is a Partner at Burr & Forman LLP practicing exclusively in the Healthcare Practice Group. Kelli may be reached at (205) 458-5429 or kfleming@burr.com.

Posted in: Legal Watch

Leave a Comment (0) →