John Stossel's Perspective on WV Certificate of Need Law

Yesterday's Daily Mail article reports that John Stossel, co-anchor of ABC's 20/20 speaking at the West Virginia Chamber of Commerce's Business Summit spoke out against West Virginia's Certificate of Need laws. Stossel argues that free market is better than regulation of health care.

Regulation vs. free market makes for great conversation. The debate as it relates to health care is made more complex when we have a largely single payor (government funded) health care reimbursement system in West Virginia. I don't know the actual statistics but well over half and probably near 75% of health care costs are paid in West Virginia by Medicare, Medicaid, PEIA and other government payors. As for private payors we only have a few that have any influence in West Virgina. This makes West Virginia close to a microcosm for a wwhat a single payor government run health care system might look like. What impact does this stagnation of competition on charges/costs have on the regulation vs. free market question. Is a single payor system better for West Virginia and the U.S.? Interesting questions as we approach the election in November.

Also, in my inbox this morning was an email from friend and health colleague, Mike Ryan, letting me know about the HealthDecisions '08: Obama and McCain on Health Care. Although I haven't had a chance to explore the site in detail I like the side by side comparison on the main page.

The press release indicates:

HealthDecision '08 by HealthCare.com is an initiative to inform, educate and deploy the power of the web to gather public opinion on the health care proposals put forth by Senators Barack Obama and John McCain. HealthDecision '08 provides a side-by-side comparison of Obama's and McCain's healthcare positions and proposals, along with interactive voting tools that enable users to vote for their preferred health care plan and offer their own comments after weighing through the issues.

What do others think? Post your comments.

Learning: Privacy and Security Monitoring, Audits and Investigations

On November 13, 2007, I will be speaking at a Lorman Eduational Services seminar to be held in Charleston, West Virginia. The seminar topic is "Health Care Information Privacy and Security Monitoring, Audits and Investigations: How to avoid an investigation and what you should expect if the state or federal officials call". You can register online here.

Also speaking at the seminar will be (read full bios):

• Terri Barrett, the assistant chief privacy officer at the West Virginia Health Care Authority in Charleston

• Mike Harmon, compliance officer for the West Virginia Public Employees Insurance Agency who oversees HIPAA compliance for PEIA and the Department of Administration

• Jack Shaffer, CIO for the Community Health Network of West Virginia who has experience in all aspects of technology, including systems development, enterprise application integration, networking, telecommunications, data center operations, database administration, disaster recovery, security and mobile computing.

Below is a copy of the seminar agenda:

9:00 am – 10:30 am	Legal Overview of HIPAA Privacy and Security Enforcement
	Robert L. Coffield, Esq.
	HIPAA Refresher on Enforcement Rules and Penalties OCR Privacy Investigation Statistics Best Practices on Conducting Internal Investigations Responding to OCR/CMS Investigation
10:30 am – 10:45 am	Break
10:45 am – 11:30 am	Preparing for an Audit
	Michael T. Harmon, CIPP/G
	Auditing vs. Monitoring Other Governmental Auditors – e.g., OIG, Legislature Elements of the OIG Audit of Piedmont Hospital in Atlanta New Kennedy/Leahy Legislation and Changes to Current Practice Privacy and Security Accreditation
11:30 am – 12:30 pm	Lunch (On Your Own)
12:30 pm – 2:30 pm	Technologies and Procedures for HIPAA Compliance
	Jack L. Shaffer Jr.
	Acceptable Use Policies and Enforcement Protecting PHI With Encryption Technologies Auditing and Monitoring Tools
2:30 pm – 2:45 pm	Break
2:45 pm – 3:45 pm	The Role of the Privacy Officer
	Terrisita Barrett, CIPP
	The Changing Privacy and Security Landscape Role and Responsibilities: Past, Present and Future Challenges Affecting the Privacy Officer Role
3:45 pm – 4:30 pm	Panel Discussion, and Questions and Answers
	Terrisita Barrett, CIPP, Robert L. Coffield, Esq.,
	Michael T. Harmon, CIPP/G, and Jack L. Shaffer Jr.

ADVANCE Magazine - Article on EHRs and PHRs

Recently I was interviewed for an article looking at the legal issues involved in the developing world of EHRs and PHRs written by Beth Walsh for ADVANCE Magazine. The article, Looking at Legality: Medical Records - New questions and concerns are popping up around the legalities of EHRs and PHRs, appears in the August 11, 2008 edition of the magazine.

Those interested in reading the article can register for the free online digital edition of ADVANCE Magazine (left side bar). The article appears on page 24.

FSB: Best Lawyers in America 2011

This past week I received notice that I was again selected by my peers for inclusion in The Best Lawyers in America® 2011 in the field of "Health Care Law".

In all, nine lawyers from Flaherty Sensabaugh Bonasso PLLC were selected for inclusion in The Best Lawyers in America® 2011. Congratulations to my partners, David Givens and Mark Robinson, who were selected for the first time this year in the category of "Medical Malpractice".

Below is a list of all the 2011 FSB honorees:

• Mike Bonasso - Commercial Litigation
• Stephen Brooks - Medical Malpractice Law and Personal Injury Litigation
• Bob Coffield - Health Care Law
• Tom Flaherty - Personal Injury Litigation
• David Givens - Medical Malpractice Law
• Ted Martin - Medical Malpractice Law
• Mark Robinson - Medical Malpractice Law
• Don Sensabaugh - Medical Malpractice Law and Personal Injury Litigation
• Jeff Wakefield - Bet-the-Company Litigation, Commercial Litigation, Medical Malpractice

Best Lawyers is based on an exhaustive peer-review survey in which more than 39,000 leading attorneys cast almost 3.1 million votes on the legal abilities of other lawyers in their practice areas. Corporate Counsel magazine has called Best Lawyers "the most respected referral list of attorneys in practice."

The Use of Arbitration Agreements in Health Care

Ryan Brown, a health care attorney at Flaherty, Sensabaugh & Bonasso, PLLC who I regularly work with recently put together information on the use of arbitration agreements in the health care setting. More and more these types of agreements are being used as a way to avoid unnecessary litigation and provide an alternative venue to resolve health care conflicts between provider and patient.

Following are some excerpts about the topic from Ryan:

As many health care providers know all too well, disputes can often arise between a patient and a health care provider. Many times, the dispute can result in litigation in which a jury will be given the ultimate responsibility of resolving the conflict. However, courts are not the only venue for resolving these conflicts. An ever increasing number of health care providers, especially long-term care facilities, are looking at arbitration as an alternative to the traditional litigation system.

Health care providers in favor of arbitrating disputes point to benefits such as the ability to select an arbitrator who is an expert in the appropriate field, the ability to keep the dispute private, reduced time frame for resolving disputes, and the finality of the decision. Arbitration advocates also point out that arbitration is less expensive than the traditional litigation system.

Over the last decade, many state courts have upheld arbitration agreements that were signed prior to the patient receiving treatment by a physician, hospital, or nursing home. Additionally, courts have held that these arbitration agreements are enforceable not only to the patient, but also any potential beneficiaries of the patient’s estate.

In order to maintain the enforceability of arbitration agreements, a health care provider should strictly comply with the Federal Arbitration Act, state arbitration statutes, and state contract law. Additionally, health care providers should be mindful to carefully draft arbitration agreements and establish proper procedures for presenting arbitration agreements to patients so that courts do not determine the arbitration agreements to be unenforceable.

Ryan A. Brown concentrates his practice on providing legal counsel to a variety of health care providers in medical professional liability actions. Mr. Brown’s experience in medical malpractice cases includes defending nursing homes, hospitals, physicians, and nurses in all phases of litigation. Apart from his health care litigation practice, Mr. Brown provides legal counsel to health care providers and corporations involved in acquisitions and joint ventures.

Contact Ryan if you are interesting in learning more about the use of arbitration in the health care setting and how to include arbitration provisions and protections in your health care agreements.

West Virginia Health Care Authority Revises Fee Schedule for Certificate of Need Program

On July 15, 2009, the West Virginia Health Care Authority filed with the West Virginia Secretary of State proposed amendments to the its procedural rule regarding the schedule of fees for the filing of certificate of need applications and exemption requests under the West Virginia Certificate of Need Program.

The amendment revises the fee schedule pursuant to Senate Bill 321 passed during the 2009 Legislative Session. The amendment required the fee schedule contain a maximum amount or cap for certificate of need application fees.

The proposed rule, Fee Schedule for Certificate of Need Matters, CSR 65-10 (redline version showing amendments) has been filed with the West Virginia Secretary of State. Written comments to the proposed rule may be submitted to the Authority before August 14, 2009 at 5:00 p.m.

Injunction Halts WVHCA Cardiac Demonstration Project

Today's State Journal reports on Kanawha County Circuit Judge Stucky's granting of a preliminary injunction halting the West Virginia Health Care Authority from moving forward with a demonstration program that would enable three West Virginia hospitals to perform therapeutic angioplasties without having open heart backup services. The injunction was filed in seperate actions by St. Mary's Medical Center and St. Joseph's Hospital.

Details on the demonstration pilot project can be found under Section VII of the State Health Plan Cardiac Catheterization Standards.

WV Pharmacies Are Not Health Care Providers

The West Virginia Supreme Court of Appeals ruled in a June 28 decision (Phillips v. Larry's Drive-In Pharmacy, Inc. No. 33194; Maynard, concurring opinion) that pharmacies do not enjoy the benefits of the 1986 amendments to the Medical Professional Liability Act.

The decision reversed the Circuit Court decision finding that a pharmacy is a health care provider under the Act. The Supreme Court found that that "a pharmacy is not a “health care provider” as defined by the Legislature in W.Va. Code, 55-7B-2(c)."

Further, the Court found that "where there is any doubt about the meaning or intent of a statute in derogation of the common law, the statute is to be interpreted in the manner that makes the least rather than the most change in the common law." (Syllabus Point 5).

The WV Record reports on the decision here.

WV Northern District Court: Attorney Filing Manual

Brian Peterson highlights a great resource for lawyers who regularly practice in the United States District Court for the Northern District Court of West Virginia.

The Attorney Filing Manual is a 20 page manual that provides guidance to lawyers on how to e-file certain types of documents wth the Court. The manual explains when documents should be filed electronically and the exceptions to the mandatory electronic filing requirements. The manual contains specifics on the filing of all types of pleadings and provides sample certificate of services format for electronic filing.

The manual also discussed the use of "hyperlinks" in documents and allows electronically filed documents to contain hyperlinks to other portions of the document or to internet sites that contain source documkents for citations. However, the manual states that hyperlinks do not replace standard citations format and "neither the hyperlink, or any site to which it refers, shall be considered part of the record."

What Health Care Employers Need to Know about the West Virginia Patient Safety Act

Ryan Brown, a health care attorney at Flaherty Sensabaugh Bonasso PLLC who specializes in medical malpractice defense, health care regulatory work and health care related employment issues wrote this summary of the West Virginia Patient Safety Act.

In 2001, the West Virginia Legislature passed the Patient Safety Act (“PSA”), W.Va. Code § 16-39-1 et seq. The purpose of the PSA was to provide an avenue for health care workers to report instances of waste or wrongdoing without the fear of retaliatory or discriminatory treatment by their employers through termination, demotion, reduction of time, lost wage, or lost benefits. The PSA requires the identity of a health care worker who reports waste or wrongdoing to a health care entity (e.g., hospital, clinic, nursing facility, etc.) or appropriate governmental authority to remain confidential. Health care entities are also required to post a summary of the important provisions of the PSA on the premises for its employees.

It is important for health care entities to understand that the PSA prohibits retaliation or discrimination against a health care worker who made a good faith report; advocated on behalf of patients, services or conditions of a health care entity; or cooperated in any investigation relating to the care, services or conditions of the health care entity. A health care worker who has been retaliated or discriminated against by his or her employer in violation of the PSA may file a civil suit and recover payment of back wages, costs of the litigation, reasonable attorney fees, and even reinstatement.

Many employers in West Virginia have had experience with the West Virginia Human Rights Act (“WVHRA”), W.Va. Code § 5-11-1 et seq, and its exception to the “at-will” employment doctrine. The WVHRA prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, religion, color, national origin, ancestry, sex, age, disability, and familial status. The WVHRA has been used by former employees as a way to defeat “at-will” employment by alleging that they were wrongfully terminated based on a protected status, rather than for unsatisfactory job performance. Although initially designed to improve the quality of patient care, the PSA has also been used by some former health care employees as a way to get around the concept of “at-will” employment. For example, a discharged health care worker could potentially sue his former employer using the PSA to allege that he was discriminated against after he reported instances of the employer’s waste and wrongdoing.

Health care entities must take special care not only to document the unsatisfactory performance of its employees, but also document and investigate complaints of waste or wrongdoing to shield itself from such PSA lawsuits. These lawsuits can be quite complicated as they encompass elements of both employment litigation and medical professional liability litigation.

Proposed Certificate of Need Rule: Hospital Ambulatory Health Care Facility

On June 8, 2009, the West Virginia Health Care Authority filed a proposed legislative rule with the Secretary of State and Legislative Rule-Making Review Committee titled Hospital Ambulatory Health Care Facilities. CSR 65-27. The official notice can be found in the June 12, 2009 issue of the West Virginia Register.

The proposed rule impacts the procedure used by West Virginia hospitals to obtain approval prior to developing an ambulatory health care facility. The proposed legislative rule establishes the circumstances and procedures by which a certificate of need may not be required for the construction, development, acquisition or other establishment by a hospital of an ambulatory health care facility. The proposed rule sets out exemption criteria and the exemption procedure.

The Authority established a comment period for interested parties to submit comments concerning the  proposed rule. Written comments must be submitted to the Authority before July 8, 2009 at 5:00 p.m.

West Virginia Lawyer Disciplinary Board Issues Legal Ethics Opinion on Metadata

On June 10, 2009, the West Virginia Lawyer Disciplinary Board issued Legal Ethics Opinion 2009-01 (What is Metadata and Why Should Lawyers Be Cautious?) to raise awareness among lawyers to be cautious when dealing with metadata. The opinion describes "metadata" as the data behind the data - including the location where the document is created, opened or saved, author's identity, number of revisions, comments and redlining.

The opinion concludes that lawyers have a duty on both ends. The lawyer sending electronic information has the burden of understanding what information may be contained in the electronic document and take reasonable steps to protect metadata in transmitted documents. Likewise, the receiving lawyer has the duty and burden when receiving inadvertently provided metadata to consult with the sender and abide by the senders instructions before reviewing such metadata.

The opinion also points out that different rules on removing metadata apply in the context of responding to discovery responses and subpoenas. In this case the electronic documents may be tangible evidence and the rules of professional conduct may prohibit the removal of metadata, subject to an assertion that the metadata is privileged.

More thoughts on the metadata opinion by Brian Peterson at West Virginia Legal Weblog.

The West Virginia Lawyer Disciplinary Board also issued Legal Ethics Opinion 2009-02 (Wholly-Owned Subsidiary Law Firms) on June 10, 2009. This opinion looks at the question of whether one law firm can organize a wholly-owned subsidiary law firm. The Board concluded that law firms are allowed to form wholly-owned subsidiary entities but cautioned that law firms should keep these entities transparent and fully disclose to the public and clients the relationship among the seperate entities.

were passed by the Lawyer Disciplinary Board at its June 5, 2009 meeting and entered on June 10, 2009. Click here 2009-01 and 2009-02 for the full Opinions.

WVHCA Issues Proposed CON Standards For Bone Marrow Transplantation Service

The West Virginia Health Care Authority has issued new proposed Certificate of Need Standards for Bone Marrow Transplantation Services. For more information go to the "Notice of Public Comment Period".

The proposed CON standards are out for public comment. Public comments can be submitted to the WVHCA no later than July 6, 2007. Notice of the proposed standards were published in today's Charleston Gazette legal advertisement (June 16, 2007).

The proposed standards indicated that West Virginia bone marrow transplants are currently performed exclusively at West Virginia University Hosptials, Inc. The standards state that WVUH "performed 43 bone marrow transplants in 2003, 37 in 2004 and 46 in 2005." The proposed standards indicate that WVUH will be the exclusive provider of bone marrow transplantations service in West Virginia.

Reversal of Conviction Because Undisclosed MySpace Friendship Between Defendant and Juror

Brian Peterson posts on a fascinating West Virginia Supreme Court of Appeals decision involving the use of social media between a juror and defendant and the issue of disclosure of such connections during voir dire.

In State v. Dellinger, No 3573 (W.Va. Supr. Ct. June 3, 2010) (PDF version) the West Virginia Supreme Court reversed a felony conviction of a Braxton County Sheriff due to a juror's "complete lack of candor" during voir dire. The juror and defendant were MySpace friends, but hardly knew each other. The Court found that the juror should have disclosed the relationship.

The Court describes the juror misconduct as follows:

At the direction of the trial judge, an investigation into alleged juror misconduct was conducted concerning Juror Amber Hyre. During the course of the investigation and at the June 11, 2008, hearing, it was learned that on February 7, 2008, approximately one week before Appellant's trial began, Juror Hyre sent a message to Appellant on “www.MySpace.com,” a social networking website. In that message, Juror Hyre, known as “Amber,” wrote to Appellant:

Hey, I dont know you very well But I think you could use some advice! I havent been in your shoes for a long time but I can tell ya that God has a plan for you and your life. You might not understand why you are hurting right now but when you look back on it, it will make perfect sence. I know it is hard but just remember that God is perfect and has the most perfect plan for your life. Talk soon!

According to Juror Hyre, after she sent this message to Appellant, the two became MySpace “friends,” which allowed Appellant to view postings on Juror Hyre's MySpace page and vice versa.

At the end of the decision, the Court in footnote 11 highlights the need for lawyers and judges to instruct jurors of their responsibility and provides a cautionary note to them about using technology during the trial process and deliberation. The Court provides a link to the model jury instruction developed by the Committee on Court Administration and Case Management of the Judicial Conference of the United States. I previously blogged about this Model Jury Instruction here.

The footnote reads:

As noted above, Juror Hyre posted a message on her MySpace page during the course of the trial in which she wrote, “Amber Just got home from Court and getting ready to get James and Head to church! Then back to court in the morning!” Next to “mood,” she wrote the word “blah.” The trial court found that Juror Hyre “did not state which trial she was hearing or any facts or opinions about the trial.” Though this Court does not condone any communication about a case by a sitting juror, we agree with the trial court's apparent finding that Juror Hyre's posting was benign in nature. We believe that, standing alone, it was not sufficient to find that she engaged in juror misconduct. However, we also believe some cautionary words are warranted concerning the prominent presence of the internet and routine use of and dependence upon various technologies by everyday Americans called to jury service. In an effort to preclude jurors from using cell phones, computers and social media websites such as MySpace, the Committee on Court Administration and Case Management of the Judicial Conference of the United States has endorsed a model jury instruction for federal district court judges to help deter jurors from using such technology for improper purposes (such as communicating about their case or conducting their own research). [Rules for Jurors: No Talking, Texting, Tweeting,] The National Law Journal, February 9, 2010, available at http//www.law.com/jsp/law technologynews/PubArticleLTN.jsp?id=1202442983764. For example, the jury instruction to be given before trial cautions, inter alia:
I know that many of you use cell phones, Blackberries, the internet and other tools of technology. You also must not talk to anyone about this case or use these tools to communicate electronically with anyone about the case. . . .You may not communicate with anyone about the case on your cell phone, through e-mail, Blackberry, iPhone, text messaging, or on Twitter, through any blog or website, through any internet chat room, or by way of any other social networking websites, including Facebook, MySpace, LinkedIn, and YouTube.”

The jury instruction to be given at the close of the case similarly provides:
During your deliberations, you must not communicate with or provide any information to anyone by any means about this case. You may not use any electronic device or media, such as a telephone, cell phone, smart phone, iPhone, Blackberry or computer; the internet, any internet service, or any text or instant messaging service; or any internet chat room, blog, or website such as FaceBook, MySpace, LinkedIn, YouTube or Twitter, to communicate to anyone any information about this case or to conduct any research about this case until I accept your verdict.

We note that, presently, there are no similar uniform standards for jurors in state trials. Id.

Lesson: If you are called for jury duty be sure to review all your MySpace, Facebook, Twitter, etc. contacts to make sure you have no connection to the parties in the matter. The case also highlights that technology has allowed all of us to develop new (more extended, not necessarily deeper) relationships with people that we don't really consider part of our "in person" social circle.The case also points out that jurors need to "go off the grid" during trial and deliberation process.

To get the full context of what occurred I recommend reading the full decision. Also, jump over to Brian's blog post to read more of his comments on the decision. I agree with his conclusion, "It's clear that voir dire and jury instructions need to catch up with technology."

UPDATE (6/15/10): Eric Goldman at the Technology & Marketing Blog and Molly DiBianca at Going Paperless provides additional analysis and thoughts on the decision.

UPDATE (6/18/2010): Ry Rivard at the Charleston Daily Mail covers the decision in his story, Web stirs problems in jury selection.

FSB Welcomes Tom Clark

A warm welcome to J. Thomas "Tom" Clark who recently joined Flaherty Sensabaugh Bonasso PLLC as Senior Counsel. Tom is a welcomed addition to our corporate practice group and will help to expand the level of representation that we provide our health care, oil and gas, coal and banking industry clients.

Tom comes to FSB with over 10 years of experience in handling business organization and commercial transactions. Tom received his undergraduate degree from Virginia Tech in 1993 and his J.D. from the University of Pittsburgh in 1997.

New WV Law Blog: West Virginia Business Litigation

Just a quick note to welcome another West Virginia lawyer, Jeff Mehalic, now blogging at West Virginia Business Litigation. It appears he started blogging in April. Looking at his past few posts looks like he will be generating some great content. Interesting reading, especially for West Virginia lawyers.

Welcome Jeff. I've added you to my blog roll list under the West Virginia Blog section. Be sure to check out some of the other West Virginia blogs. Your blog also now entitles you to attend the next meeting of CAB (reminds me that we need to schedule a get together).

Justia's RSS Federal Register

Do you have a need to monitor the federal rules, proposed rules and orders on a particular topic or particular agency? If so, Justia's Regulation Tracker to the rescue. A very useful tool for those of us in the highly regulated world of health care.

Thanks to Tom Mighell at inter alia I just learned about this new feature. I've added a couple of test RSS feeds on topics that I regularly try to monitor. You can also browse by government agency. I've been using Justia's federal court filings RSS feeds for a while to monitor cases filed in the Southern and Northern Districts of West Virginia but wasn't aware of this new federal rule tracker.

WVHCA: Proposed Amendments to Cardiac Catheterization Standards

The West Virginia Health Care Authority approved for public comment proposed revisions to the Certificate of Need Cardiac Catheterization Standards (current 3/19/2007 standards).

These revisions were made by the Authority after Governor Manchin rejected the previously proposed standards. The proposed standards continue to modify the requirements for the participants in the demo pilot project involving offering therapeutic cardiac catheterization.

The standards distinguish between Primary (Emergency) Percutaneous Coronary Intervention (Primary PCI) which involves providing cardiac catheterization services within 120 minutes of an emergency myocardial infarction and Elective Therapeutic Catheterizations. The proposed standards also set new need threshold levels for elective therapeutic catheterization.

Written comments on the proposed standards may be submitted to Dayle D. Stepp, Director of Certificate of Need, no later than May 23, 2008.

I previously reported on the modifications to the standards here, here and here.

WV Environmental Law

A welcome to West Virginia's newest law blogger, Dave Yaussey, who is blogging at the WV Environmental Law. Dave is a partner at Robinson & McElwee in their Charleston office.

I use to practice law with Dave and consider him to be one of the go to environmental lawyers in West Virginia. During a conversation a few months ago talked to him about blogging and suggested that he start one on environmental law. He took up the challenge and is off and running. Congrats Dave!

Lorman Medical Records Law Seminar: March 18, 2010

On March 18, 2010 I will be speaking on Medical Records Law at a seminar in Charleston, West Virginia. The seminar is sponsored by Lorman Educational Services. Joining me for the day long seminar will be three very knowledgeable health care colleagues:

• Michael T. Harmon, MPA, CIPP/G, Compliance Specialist for the West Virginia Mutual Insurance Company, a Medical Professional Liability Insurance Company
• Sallie H. Milam, J.D., CIPP/G, Executive Director of the West Virginia Health Information Network and Chief Privacy Officer for the West Virginia State Government
• James W. Thomas, Esq., Manager of the Charleston, West Virginia Business Law Department of Jackson Kelly PLLC whose practice focuses primarily upon health care matters of a business, regulatory and operational nature
  

Additional information about the seminar and how to register can be found at Lorman Educational Services. Following is the full seminar agenda:

8:30 am – 9:00 am			Registration
9:00 am – 9:15 am			Overview
9:15 am – 10:30 am			HIPAA Compliance: Reality and Perspective
			— Michael T. Harmon, MPA, CIPP/G
			Overview Enforcement Complaints Case Examples Summary of HITECH Changes
10:30 am – 10:45 am			Break
10:45 am – 12:00 pm			HITECH Financial Incentives for Implementation of HIT
			— James W. Thomas, Esq.
			Qualifying an Electronic Health Record System Available Financial Incentives
12:00 pm – 1:00 pm			Lunch (On Your Own)
1:00 pm – 2:00 pm			Health Information Exchange in West Virginia: Impact on Patient Records
			— Sallie H. Milam, J.D., CIPP/G
2:00 pm – 2:15 pm			Break
2:15 pm – 3:30 pm			Consumer Driven Health Care: HITECH, Health 2.0, Social Media and Personal Health Records
			— Robert L. Coffield, Esq.
			HITECH Breach Notification Requirements Impact of Health 2.0 and Social Media Technology on the Future of Health Care Development and Adoption of Personal Health Records Discuss the Legal Implications of Emerging Technology
3:30 pm – 4:30 pm			Panel Discussion
			— Robert L. Coffield, Esq., Michael T. Harmon, MPA, CIPP/G, Sallie H. Milam, J.D., CIPP/G and James W. Thomas, Esq.