Posted by bryte on September 3, 2014, at 0:02:55
In reply to Re: discussion-**trigger warning** re: suicide » 10derheart, posted by ClearSkies on September 2, 2014, at 11:11:33
> Yes, it did happen, and in one instance, I was on "duty" as deputy, and had no access to ISPs or poster information. And Dr Bob was not able to be reached.
> The outcome was, fortunately, positive in that the attempt failed.
>
> I resigned the next day.
>
Before I would "volunteer" for "duty" as a "deputy" in Robert Hsiung's business corporation, I would ask how his corporate structure affects my liability under the U.S. Volunteer Protection Act of 1997. That law shields from liability those who volunteer for non-profit organizations and government entities.Available information does not indicated Dr. Bob, LLC is a non-profit organization.
An IRS document discusses whether an LLC can qualify as a 501(c)3. In some cases it can. One requirement is that members of the LLC must be either a 501(c)3, a governmental unit or a governmental instrumentality. Illinois' corporation search says management of Dr. Bob LLC includes only one member - a private individual: Robert Hsiung.
Illinois also provides for organization of non-profits in the General Not for Profit Corporation Act of 1986. That act provides that the name of a nonprofit must end with the letters "NFP" if there is any doubt, and "Shall be distinguishable" from a limited liability company. Is Dr. Bob, LLC an Illinois NFP?
Are volunteers informed of the sufficiency of corporate organization as it could affect their liability when they accept quasi-administrative roles?
Were "deputies" informed whether they had rescue resources, counseling support by an uninvolved provider and protection from legal liability before they consented to perform "duty" overseeing a forum where suicide emergencies have not only occurred, but were the subject of a "case study?"
The question remains:
Is the host of this site flying without a net, depending on his own seat-of-the-pants discretion, organized as a typical business corporation to provide supposedly charitable services to at-risk invitees while routinely providing subject matter for his submissions to professional research-oriented publications?
Are people attracted to a forum hosted by a health-care professional in part by an expectation of evidence-based practices, including in administration of health-related social networks?
Can at-risk guests reasonably expect more or less evidence-based administrative practice at a forum hosted by a mental health professional as compared to other social networks?
When people provide informed consent here, do they knowingly decide to participate in practices based not on evidence, but on the operator's nuanced discretion?
Are case studies based on activities of participants who did not consent to participate in research adequate to inform evidence-based best practices?
Do a doctor's relationships used as a source of evidence in a quest for evidence-based best practices imply a need for legally adequate informed consent?
poster:bryte
thread:1070154
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20140902/msgs/1070697.html