-
9 votes
-
AI’s new frontier: Connecting grieving loved ones with the deceased
7 votes -
They told their therapists everything. Hackers leaked it all.
15 votes -
Why the extortion of Vastaamo matters far beyond Finland – and how cyber pros are responding
4 votes -
Finland's interior minister summoned an emergency meeting after patient records at a private Finnish psychotherapy center were accessed by hackers
5 votes -
Tele-health privacy concerns are a barrier to therapy
Here in the States, you hear about your insurance company waiving co-pays for tele-health therapy visits in these “uncertain times,” but searching for providers confronts you with even more...
Here in the States, you hear about your insurance company waiving co-pays for tele-health therapy visits in these “uncertain times,” but searching for providers confronts you with even more uncertainty. How do you evaluate their practices for safety and privacy? Every other practitioner subscribes to a different platform. Some, to my horror, use Zoom. Others have adopted a software suite to manage their entire practice. These therapists rely on the same company for scheduling appointment reminders, recording session notes, billing insurance, and running a video chat. When I have requested to connect via Signal, they express a preference for their platform, usually citing HIPAA compliance. One recommended a finding a provider who uses paper records as the only avenue open to me. But wasn’t there a time before companies like Spruce, SimplePractice, and TheraNest, where sensitive session notes were somehow distinct, less “networked” than today? How are therapists determining the privacy and security protections of their platform? How do I? Does anyone have experience with these companies?
13 votes -
The Eliza Effect
10 votes