Chicago Hospital Freaks, Nearly Bans Visitor For Taking Photo From Window
Kurt was at Resurrection Medical Center in Chicago yesterday, where his father is in rehab after a recent stroke, and he was nearly kicked out because he took a photo of the setting sun out the window from a hallway.
Before even reviewing the picture, I heard a woman yell, "What do you think you're doing?!" I looked up, seeing an angry looking woman briskly coming down the hall at me.
"Taking a photo of the sun," I replied.
"You're in a hospital!" she shrilly declared.
"Yes, obviously."
"I've called security, you stay here!"
Kurt didn't stay there, but told her his father had been there for 3 weeks now and he was going to go join him at dinner.
And so I did. I joined my father at dinner. Within minutes, someone tapped me on the shoulder. It was a security guard.But that wasn't the end of it—a hospital official joined them before the dinner was over and "explained" the problem:"Sir, can you come with me?"
"Certainly."
"Were you taking photos in the hospital?" he asked, seemingly bored.
"Yes, I took a photo out the hallway window in the 3rd floor of the sun." I showed him the photo.
"Okay, just don't do it again. Thanks." It seemed like he was just a guy doing his job so I agreed and went back to sit with my father.
"See, they're all pinheads," commented my father.
He exasperatedly explained to me that I could not take photos anywhere on the hospital grounds because it violated the employees' rights. I was also told that I was not allowed anywhere but with my father. Failure to comply with these requests would result in being escorted by the still present security guard. At this point, he also demanded my driver's license as proof of the incident.Okay, so let's look at some possible reasons to ban photographs at a hospital:
- to protect the privacy of employees;
- to protect the privacy of patients;
- to prevent situations where someone taking pictures may get in the way of helping the sick and injured;
It seems reasonable that those three needs can be met with a sign posted at every entrance that says something like, "Please do not take photographs of employees or patients. No cameras allowed in hallways or treatment areas." Hey, and then you could also tell employees to memorize and repeat those two restrictions one time only to offenders, along with "Hospital policy!" at the end. If they spy a repeat offender, they call security. Another problem solved! You're welcome!
In other words: We get that the hospital wants to protect the privacy of employees and patients, but obviously a simple explanation of the no-photos policy would have sufficed. Bringing two employees to twice interrupt a visitor's dinner with his father is the kind of overreaction that happens when you equate photographs with terrorism, and cameras with guns.
Kurt writes,
I wanted to point out that I didn't take a picture of any person, or that I couldn't possibly know their absurd policy since there was no signage posted anywhere. And if a search of their site is any indication, the only person who is aware of this policy is the the head of security himself.But he didn't say anything, because his father is there in rehab and he didn't want to get kicked out.
We tried contacting Resurrection to find out what their official photo policy was, but we were transferred from the front desk to security, then given a number to guest relations that didn't work. (The security guy said it was probably closed for the evening.) Nobody we actually spoke with was willing to say anything about a photo policy for visitors.
This writer thinks there's another reason for all the photo banning currently in vogue: it's a superstitious attempt to retroactively prevent 9/11 from ever having happened. Letting a stranger shoot a photo has become a symbol of invasion and assault, of scheming and revenge. Or maybe it's also a fear of Flickr. At any rate, this writer half-seriously suggests maybe earmarking some public funds for a national re-education campaign about the moral neutrality of "Taking Photos."
"Hospital forbids photos of the sun!" [fiftytwofifty]
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Nam malesuada commodo erat et molestie. Duis pellentesque aliquam bibendum. Suspendisse venenatis lobortis eleifend. Mauris id est sed lectus convallis aliquam.
Post a comment
Comments:
@sarusa: No, patient confidentiality has something to do with it as well. I can see the hospital's point, inasmuch that they don't want youtube wackiness from a hospital getting out there.
It was handled badly, but I can see where the hospital is coming from.
Absolutely ridiculous. I've lost count of the number of times I've brought a camera to a hospital - usually after the birth of a baby, to snap pictures. I've never once been told I can't, and have even had nurses hold the babies up for photos! Their photo rules should be clearly posted, or ban cameras, but I don't know how they'll be able to adequately enforce that rule though - almost every cell phone sold nowadays can take pictures.
The reaction by the hospital is over the top. Clearly something else is up. To ask for a driver license is pure intimidation. Private institution that want to prohibit such behavior, but for them to spring this on someone and then threaten them is abusive. Write your attorney general a letter, and send them a copy. Be sure to mention you are talking to a lawyer about the emotional distress. Mention the guard and hospital director type name. Let the worthless little shits think twice next time they feel like pushing someone around.
Every hospital I've been in seems to have cameras mounted in many places. Maybe this hospital too. If they do, maybe you should grab that security guard and frantically show him a mounted camera - which would most definitely be "taking pictures" of employees and patients. And possibly, God forbid, of the setting sunset.
Dumb policy that was probably written in a blanket fashion without any regard for the reality of a hospital. I took a bunch of pictures within a hospital when my kid nearly died, and if I had been denied because of some stupid and unreasonable policy like this I would have damn sure pushed the issue. Thankfully he lived, we and the staff were damn happy to see it and the pics are a memento for him to remember his fight.
TAKING PICTURES OF A SUNSET - OUTSIDE THE BUILDING? Last I checked, the sun does not ask to remain anonymous and has absolutely no problems with anyone in the world photographing it, even in the buff, at any time.
@sarusa: When my stepdad was in the hospital (one of the many times), he'd gotten some really shitty treatment from the nurses, so my mom took pictures to document his injuries that he'd sustained *in* the hospital!
I think there's a major difference, though, between the pediatric ward and a floor where there are patients recovering from strokes. You're in bad shape. I lost my mind in a Best Buy the other day because a kid was taking my picture with a camera on display, god only knows how I'd react if I had a colostomy or something and some stranger who I didn't know was running around taking snapshots. It's how pictures like lemonparty get on the internet.
Again: hospital overreacted. But you should be ensured your privacy in a hospital.
@dweebster: RTFA. The pictures were taken from a hallway inside the hospital, out a window. The hospital employee saw suspicious behavior.
This, while overreaction actually makes sense. The enforcement is a little over the top but there are plenty of legit reasons as to why a hospital would want to prevent photographers from snapping around the hospital.
1. HIPAA. Cower in fear of the almighty hand of the federal government here. Give yourself a HIPAA violation and you're looking at serious fines from the feds and issues with licensing boards and almost every regulatory body. HIPAA is no joke. Anything that might identify a patient by name, chart, etc, as seen by the camera could be a problem. Hypothetically you shouldn't be able to get to any place where you could garner such info, but it's the hospital's job to prevent it from happening.
2. General protection of other patients. If I'm in the hospital, the last thing I want is some random guy coming in to take photos of me.
3. Protecting the workers. We're a litigious society enough as it is. Hospitals will have no need for a wannabe Jacob Riis running around taking pictures of negligence (whether real or imagined).
4. Photography rights. While they don't have rights to the sun, for example, most hospitals make it pretty clear that they have rights to use photos taken in the hospital by their people for their publications. (This is a bit of a stretch, but it's something to think about).
There are probably more, but these are the first I could think of. It actually makes sense, albeit the enforcement was pretty awful.
Hmm this sounds more like they fear liability for what goes on in the hospital. If they are going to have a camera policy they need to post it on the front doors if they expect people to know they have one. They can't just go running after people for rules nobody knows about.
There was a hospital in Chicago that was having former patients with old hospital bills arrested under some obscure Illinois law as part of their collection attempts. I think it was this same hospital but now I can't find the news story. Sounds about the same level of caring.
I can imagine a multitude of reasons why the hospital would freak out over people taking pictures...patient and staff privacy, possible malpractice evidence, strict HIPAA regulations, not to mention the freakout and paranoia over terrorism.
Having a cow because somebody is taking pictures of the sun is a bit much, but I'm sure the initial reaction was to the fact somebody had a camera and was using it..a third party wouldn't have known what he was taking a picture of the sun, and the paranoid reaction would be that he's taking pictures of the parking garage because he wants to blow it up later.
It was handled extremely poorly. All the hospital had to do was have one of the staff kindly inform Kurt that they don't allow cameras inside the hospital...let him take the picture of the sun, and be done with it. From the sounds of it, I'm surprised the guard didn't reach for his Tazer.
@Honus: You get it. HIPAA is there for a reason, and I can't begin to tell you how I've gleaned details about someone by looking at the background of a picture.
I'm like the guy from Psych without my father being Roger Dorn.
man, I really hate how places freak out when you take pictures.
I am glad now that most cellphones come with the ability to ake pictures.
I know stores & places have policies, but quite frankly I could care less when all I am doing is taking an innocent photograph of something & I am NOT an investigative reporter or competitor.
I am beginning to really hate places/businesses that treat you like crap because you MAY be up to no good. Dont treat me like a criminal unless I actually AM one. Your policies be damned if I am not doing anything truely wrong.
Huh. Resurrection's a big company (somehow the name implies to me that they're going to be just a tiny bit less upset if you die, but that's probably me). My baby was born in a different Resurrection hospital (St. Francis/Evanston) a couple of months ago. We took pictures all over the place and nobody said boo. They even let me bring a camera into the operating theater so I could get a picture of my son about ten seconds after he was cut out (though they were very clear telling me ahead of time I couldn't shoot or record any of the actual procedure)
@Echomatrix: (Don't mean to jump on YOU specifically for this, but you mentioned it...)
Maybe you can explain this whole "needs a sign" mentality; specifically how in the absence of a sign, common sense as well as asking permission before doing something is forfeit?
There's no sign posted in or outside my house that says "Do not leave the house naked when you walk the dog.", yet common sense tells me a naked stroll through the neighborhood is not a smart idea.
There are no "No smoking" signs in or around my office or my friend's houses, does that mean it's OK to assume it's OK to smoke there?
People complain about advertising and billboards, so I can only imagine the uproar if "Rules" signs that noted everything you can or cannot do began popping up everywhere.
My point is, common sense (Maybe the hospital doesn't want me to take pictures?) and asking permission ("Excuse me nurse? Is it ok if I take a picture of the sun setting outside the window?") have been replaced by a sense of entitlement so large, that the only solution is an all inclusive list of "rules" twice that size posted for all to see.
A couple of my own observations:
1) The guard came by, politely asked him to not take pictures, the OP agreed, the guard said "thanks", problem solved. Then, some wacked out underpaid lackie who didn't think that enough consumer abuse had occurred in the previous incident came by, berated the OP further, and demanded his drivers license.
2) This policy is PURE BS. I've had three kids, all at Weiss Hospital in Chicago, and in every case we had cameras and video cameras for the event. (No before you ask, we didn't picture or film any of the really gross parts). Anyway, the nurses and doctors were the first to tell me when it was time to get our cameras out. And, they were hamming it up, almost upstaging the "star" (our babies) with their antics. One doctor took the video camera and walked around the ward, filming people who were also hamming it up. It was a huge party. It was the best experience I ever had. Employee privacy, indeed.
OK maybe Resurrection has different policies. Fine. But they MUST know that those policies are way different than every other hospital, and they should thus POST SIGNS about their policy. Otherwise, it's just BS that somebody made up because they're an underpaid under appreciated pinhead.
@MercuryPDX: And as a caveat: Yes the hospital was a bit over the top with enforcement, but do you think the nurse would have reacted the same way if he asked first?
@humphrmi:
And you don't see a difference between taking pictures on a medical/rehab floor as opposed to a birthing environment? You're making a pretty ridiculous jump to assume that a medical/rehab floor should have the same rules as a maternity floor. One of the two represents a huge lifetime event, but I'll leave you to guess which that is.
And in the case of your experience, the doctor has waived his right to not have you film it, as has the staff. Clearly this nurse did not give the same courtesy but that's up to her.
@sibertater:
How does taking a picture of the sun violate HIPAA? Is the sun a patient of the hospital?
The inmates are running the asylum.
seems that photos are banned all over the place these days. i am one of those people that takes my camera everywhere and i can't tell you the number of times i've been told to stop taking pictures of seemingly benign things. One such incident was outside a business building in downtown Portland, OR. Apparently taking a picture of a cool looking land mark or sign is now against "policy".
@breny: i can't see how taking scenic pictures violates HIPPA. He was clearly not taking a picture of an employee, patient, or anything IN the actual hospital. I wonder if people are allowed to take pictures of their newborns in the hospital these days or could that be construed as a terrorist attack?
HIPPA is a very real and scary thing for hospitals to deal with. Its like Sarbanes Oxley but with actual teeth and about a billion times worse.
Patient privacy information is also of highest priority in these situations. As a patient unless you give express permission NO ONE is allowed to know your condition. Even your own family except under very specific conditions.
It sound crazy but the consequences of not enforcing HIPPA are very real to these hospitals. Here's another thing hospitals must adhere to JHACO. Which is basically an ISO type of certification that your staff knows the basic process and procedures for everything in the hospital, like what to do in a fire, or what a Code Pink is. When you are audited, if your staff overall doesn't do well, you lose all federal funding immediately.
So maybe I'm just a visitor taking a picture... OR I'm an auditor testing your staff and not stopping me gets you a big fat FAIL and you lose your funding.
@MercuryPDX: you must be from china or burma or some place like that. let me explain how things work in the western world. my kids were born in the hospital as most kids are here, not in the local villages. we take pictures of our newborns, mothers and ourselves with the newborns. i even took picture of mine in the lamp area as the nurse held him up. the nurse smiled nicely for the camera. never did i ask and never was i expected to ask for permission. this was at mass general hospital. these do work different in our part of the world.
@satoru: Maybe. But in that case the employees should actually know the policy and be able to explain it. The real failure here is to state and publicize the policy. All a visitor really needs is to an easy way to know what the rules are. A sign would help, but employees who are informed--and deal with violations in a reasonable fashion--are even more important.
There are masses of fail here in that regard.
@mikelotus: What does Burma or China have to do with it? The nurse didn't say squat to you when you took your camera out, and even encouraged you... so? Common sense tells you it's OK to take pictures of your newborn... what does it tell you about shooting random photos around the other areas of the hospital? Good idea? Bad idea?
@GoBobbyGo: They allowed pics of the procedures for our girls. For the second one (a much more planned and calm event) they even posed for a picture before cutting, and we snapped a shot of my wife's uterus (at her request).
Family slide shows just haven't been the same since!
@MercuryPDX: No, we don't need signs for EVERYTHING, but photography is an activity that is generally permissible in our society. How are we to know which activities are okay? Should I ask a nurse whether it's okay to wear a red shirt, or whether I can wear a wristwatch, or do a crossword puzzle? There might be contexts in which that's inappropriate behavior, but no ordinary person would know that without an explicit warning.
In some places, such as the security areas of airports, signs do indicate that photography is prohibited. That's fine--but the need for a sign indicates that most people's assumption is that in general it's fine to take pictures.
Your examples are actually quite illustrative. No, it's not okay to walk around naked in most places (and there are laws against it!), but there are of course nudist colonies where that's true. And smoking without permission is a no-no NOW, but forty or fifty years ago it wasn't; that norm has evolved. Perhaps one day our attitudes toward photography will change, and we will feel the need to ask permission to take a picture (personally, I'd ask someone for permission to take a picture of them, or of something associated with them--their pet, their artwork, etc., but I wouldn't ask the people around me if it was all right for me to photograph a sunset). So a ban on photography is one of those things that ought to be explicit.
So I'll grant that a rehabilitation floor and a birth floor are two different places. But am I the only one who's ever seen hospital pictures of actual sick people? Car accidents victims, returning soldiers, even people getting chemo - very often surrounded by smiling nurses. Should all those family members be harassed by security? I'm with the commenters who say if taking a picture out a window is such a HUGE violation of something, the policy should be posted.
@Honus:
"Sir, I'm sorry but we don't allow pictures on this ward. Please put your camera away."
-OR-
"I've called security, you stay here!" ...and... "At this point, he also demanded my driver's license as proof of the incident."
Hopefully you see the difference between the reasonable situation and the one where someone's being a pinhead.















The obvious real reason for this rule (and the reason they're all so freaked out): so nobody has any photo evidence of them doing anything incredibly stupid or negligent.