More Monsour excuses
On his hands and knees, former Monsour Medical Center CEO Michael Monsour sifted through garbage at the decaying hospital complex, searching for financial records of obvious importance to him.
But confidential patient files also dumped in the debris? Those he left behind.
Mr. Monsour says that as president of Key Care Home Health, which leased the hospital's annex before it closed, he went to the site to remove only Key Care business records — not patient or doctor records strewn about in the clutter. This, after reports of the abandoned medical files caught the attention of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, which has begun an investigation into whether federal privacy laws had been breached.
Monsour insists he's not responsible for those confidential files, which he says were secured. Then who is?
It's high time state and federal authorities find out, starting with the ex-CEO of an abandoned medical center that today has degenerated into a public safety threat.
In the meantime, the state Attorney General's Office says it will determine how best to secure those discarded patient files. And soon, we trust.
Such appalling disregard for patients and the public underscores the reprehensible mindset of the hospital's managers, who dumped their “legacy” on Jeannette six years ago. It's their legacy — and their mess — to clean up.
Show commenting policy
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.