Caregivers: how it will work

tet1953

tet1953

Well-Known Member
This was a point of confusion for me, so I called DHHS and spoke to John Theile about it. My question was, if patients choose to not register and the caregiver application requires patient identification, how does that work? It also wasn't entirely clear if it is still $300 per patient, or just $300 to be a caregiver.

I kinda knew what to expect for the second question, but thought I'd ask it anyway. Yeah, it's $300/patient. As for identification of the patient, it won't be required. Instead, we will still get a card as caregiver (it's still separate cards per patient, but maybe someday it will be just one, with number of patients on it). Instead of a patient name, you will have a "slot", basically something on file which allows you to grow x plants.

My question to John was then, "So what's stopping me from sending in an application for Joe Blow across the street so I can grow 6 extra plants?" lol what? It's an obvious question. His response was that we caregivers will need to have a copy of patient's doctor cert, should the cops ever search for some reason and do a plant count. I told John that I didn't think it sounded very workable, and we agreed we'll just have to see how well it works.
 
M

mdanforth

Well-Known Member
there will be enough people that will fuck with the system and then the legislature will bring back mandatory registration.....its up to us to be professional and to protect the freedoms that we now have......
 
S

sweetleaf76

Well-Known Member
Do any of you guys have a template of your caregiver/patient agreement form. I'm not really sure what to put on it.
 
potpharm

potpharm

Member
I'm wondering about the cargiver forms, as well. What is currently available out there to look at doesn't seem to reflect the changes in law under LD 1296, so it's a bit confusing right now. If I find anything helpful, or create something based on my understanding of the law, I'll be sure to share it.
 
S

sweetleaf76

Well-Known Member
If I understand correctly.......the state is going to develop a caregiver/patient agreement form and post it on their site. This will be required, along with a copy of your patients doctors recommendation, to have available upon request of law enforcement. I wonder if they'll wait until the 28th to put this form up on their site or if they ever will.
 
tet1953

tet1953

Well-Known Member
Not to harp on it, but I still say there is a problem with it. If a patient wants to show LEO or anybody else their cert, fine. But me as a caregiver sharing such information with a third party? I could be wrong but I think that's a HIPAA issue. Recall that it was addressed quite specifically in the previous law as it regards the state sharing such information with LEO or the courts. I don't see anything about caregivers having medical documents for their patients, and producing it to third parties, in the statute. Granted, they did a lot with the rules before so maybe that is where they will put it. Having it articulated in rules would not remove a HIPAA issue however...assuming there is one.
 
S

sweetleaf76

Well-Known Member
From LD 1296 all it says is this:

B. If the person is a primary caregiver, present upon request of a law enforcement
officer the original written document designating the person as a primary caregiver
by the qualifying patient under section 2423-A, subsection 1, paragraph E or F and
the primary caregiver's driver's license described under Title 29-A, section 1401 or a
nondriver identification card as described under Title 29-A, section 1410.

Maybe because this non-existing caregiver designation form doesn't contain any medical information about the patient it doesn't qualify as a HIPAA violation. Is releasing the patient's name to law enforcement enough to qualify for a HIPAA violation? We might have to wait until one of us gets sued to find out.
 
tet1953

tet1953

Well-Known Member
sweetleaf76 said:
From LD 1296 all it says is this:

B. If the person is a primary caregiver, present upon request of a law enforcement
officer the original written document designating the person as a primary caregiver
by the qualifying patient under section 2423-A, subsection 1, paragraph E or F and
the primary caregiver's driver's license described under Title 29-A, section 1401 or a
nondriver identification card as described under Title 29-A, section 1410.

Maybe because this non-existing caregiver designation form doesn't contain any medical information about the patient it doesn't qualify as a HIPAA violation. Is releasing the patient's name to law enforcement enough to qualify for a HIPAA violation? We might have to wait until one of us gets sued to find out.
Click to expand...
Ahh. That would appear to solve the dilemma I was referring to. I missed that in previous readings and just assumed it wasn't covered. Thanks sweetleaf.
 
cerberus

cerberus

Well-Known Member
sweetleaf76 said:
From LD 1296 all it says is this:

B. If the person is a primary caregiver, present upon request of a law enforcement
officer the original written document designating the person as a primary caregiver
by the qualifying patient under section 2423-A, subsection 1, paragraph E or F and
the primary caregiver's driver's license described under Title 29-A, section 1401 or a
nondriver identification card as described under Title 29-A, section 1410.

Maybe because this non-existing caregiver designation form doesn't contain any medical information about the patient it doesn't qualify as a HIPAA violation. Is releasing the patient's name to law enforcement enough to qualify for a HIPAA violation? We might have to wait until one of us gets sued to find out.
Click to expand...
IT IS
this is a situation where two laws contradict each other

As an old EMT I know its against the law to tell other EMT's, LEO's or anybody else for that matter if the patient has a blood born pathogen. As a matter of fact, an EMT can't tell others about it, or even tell them they are taking HIV specific drugs BUT they can point at the drug bottle.. (so emt's tell other emt's to watch their ass) this leads me to believe, I can't tell a LEO about another persons medical history or current situation, including what meds they are on..

HIPPA is pretty tight on privacy.. this will be interesting.
 
cerberus

cerberus

Well-Known Member
I'm working up a contract for patients that goes into this a little. Basically, it says that if push comes to shove I will be able to tell the LEO's their info (their doc's form and my contract as a caregiver) BUT I WILL fight it untill push and that line is one of the things me and my lawyer are still talking about... I'm willing to fight this all the way BUT I am not willing to risk patient meds for the fight, my pain is one thing anothers is entirely different..

I am more worried about the federal consequences of breaking HIPPA than I am of some buericratic paperwork shit.. (the thought being, I am completely legal as far as maine MMJ goes, I would not be legal disobeying HIPPA reg's...)

good luck gentlemen!
 
tet1953

tet1953

Well-Known Member
Here is the link:

http://www.maine.gov/dhhs/dlrs/mmm/index.shtml

For future reference, the quickest way I know to get to DHHS' info on MMJ is to:

1. go to maine.gov
2. Click on State Agencies
3. Click on G-H
4. Select Health and Human Services, Dept of Licensing and Regulatory Svcs
5. Click on Maine Medical Use of Marijuana on the left side
 
tet1953

tet1953

Well-Known Member
Be sure to get the last document, Program Bulletin. It's an attempt to explain everything. I just did a very quick read through. One thing that stuck out was that LEO can remove any excess seedlings, plants and prepared marijuana over the limits. Not sure why seedlings are included in that statement. Bear in mind, these are not rules or the law per se, it's the dept's attempt to explain things.
 
cerberus

cerberus

Well-Known Member
tet1953 said:
Be sure to get the last document, Program Bulletin. It's an attempt to explain everything. I just did a very quick read through. One thing that stuck out was that LEO can remove any excess seedlings, plants and prepared marijuana over the limits. Not sure why seedlings are included in that statement. Bear in mind, these are not rules or the law per se, it's the dept's attempt to explain things.
Click to expand...
good eye,
this:
LIMITATION ON THE NUMBER OF NON[FONT=Calibri,Calibri][FONT=Calibri,Calibri]‐[/FONT][/FONT]FLOWERING PLANTS
  1. [FONT=Calibri,Calibri][FONT=Calibri,Calibri]The department will propose limits on the number of non[/FONT][/FONT][FONT=Calibri,Calibri][FONT=Calibri,Calibri]‐[/FONT][/FONT][FONT=Calibri,Calibri][FONT=Calibri,Calibri]flowering plants in future rulemaking. [/FONT][/FONT]
[FONT=Calibri,Calibri][FONT=Calibri,Calibri][/FONT][/FONT]
[FONT=Calibri,Calibri][FONT=Calibri,Calibri][/FONT][/FONT]
[FONT=Calibri,Calibri][FONT=Calibri,Calibri]very bottom of the pdf.
[/FONT][/FONT]
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top