| Course | HI135 Legal Aspects of Health Information |
|---|---|
| Unit | Unit 2 |
| Paper type | Authorization review |
| Length | About 720 words, 5 pages double-spaced |
| Format | APA 7 student paper |
| School | Purdue University Global |
| Program | BS in Health Information Management |
| Updated | October 2026 |
Free sample paper for HI135 Unit 2
Returned, Not Released: A Unit 2 Authorization Review Testing a Life Insurer's Underwriting Release Line by Line and Finding That One Combined Signature Cannot Reach the Psychotherapy Notes It Names
[Student Name]
Purdue University Global
HI135: Legal Aspects of Health Information
Unit 2 Authorization Review
[Instructor Name]
[Date]
The insurer, the patient and the form are composite; the required elements, the special categories and the rules cited are real.
Header
Requester: underwriting department of a composite life insurer. Patient: R. T., applicant for an individual life policy. Received: March 4. Reviewer: release of information specialist. Records held: primary care, two years of outpatient behavioral health visits, and a psychologist's separately filed psychotherapy notes.
Required Elements
Each line gives the element, the form's wording and the finding (45 C.F.R. § 164.508, 2024).
1. Description of the information, specific and meaningful. Form: "any and all medical records, including psychotherapy notes, laboratory results and prescription history." Finding: present for general records; defective as to psychotherapy notes, discussed below.
2. Who may disclose. Form: "any physician, hospital, clinic or other provider." Finding: present, though broad; it covers this practice.
3. Who may receive. Form: the insurer's underwriting department and its reinsurers. Finding: present.
4. Purpose. Form: "to evaluate my application for life insurance." Finding: present.
5. Expiration date or event. Form: "valid for 24 months from the date signed." Finding: present.
6. Signature and date. Form: signed by the applicant, dated February 26. Finding: present; identity matches the registration record.
Required Statements
7. Right to revoke in writing, and how. Form: refers to the insurer's privacy notice. Finding: acceptable, since the rule allows a reference to the notice where it describes revocation.
8. Whether treatment, payment or enrollment may be conditioned on signing. Form: "Your application may not be processed without this authorization." Finding: present and lawful; an insurer may condition eligibility or enrollment on an authorization obtained for underwriting.
9. Potential for redisclosure. Form: "Information disclosed may be redisclosed by the recipient and no longer protected." Finding: present.
Every element is on the page. The defect is that one signature tries to do two jobs the rule keeps apart.
Special Categories
Psychotherapy notes. The rule defines them narrowly, as a therapist's own notes on what happened in a session, stored apart from the chart (45 C.F.R. § 164.501, 2024); this practice's psychologist files hers in a locked drawer. The rule requires a separate authorization for psychotherapy notes and does not allow it to be combined with an authorization for other information. This form names psychotherapy notes in the same sentence as everything else, under one signature. That makes the authorization defective, and the rule treats a defective authorization as invalid. It also cannot simply be read as valid for everything except the notes, because the form as signed is a combined authorization of a kind the rule prohibits. Substance use disorder records. The chart contains no records from a federally assisted substance use disorder program, so the separate federal confidentiality rules for those records do not apply here (42 C.F.R. § 2.31, 2024). The review records that this was checked. State-protected results. The scenario's state requires specific written consent for HIV test results. One result exists in the laboratory section. The form does not mention HIV testing.
Verdict
Return the form, unprocessed, with a letter explaining two problems: psychotherapy notes need a separate authorization, signed on its own, if the applicant chooses to allow their release; and the HIV result requires the state's specific consent. Offer to process a corrected general authorization promptly, excluding psychotherapy notes and the HIV result unless separately authorized. Nothing is released in the meantime.
Why Not Release the Rest Now
Partial release on a defective form would rest on the department's reading of what the applicant probably meant, which is exactly the judgment an authorization exists to take away from us. The applicant signed one form covering everything; releasing part of it is releasing on a form the applicant never signed. Returning it costs the insurer about a week and protects the applicant's choice about the most sensitive part of his record.
Log Entry
The return is logged with the date, the reason and the reviewer's name, so that if the applicant later asks why his application was delayed, the record answers.
References
42 C.F.R. § 2.31 (2024). https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-42/section-2.31
45 C.F.R. § 164.508 (2024). https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-45/section-164.508
45 C.F.R. § 164.501 (2024). https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-45/section-164.501
What the HI135 Unit 2 assignment asks for
Unit 2 usually asks you to review a signed authorization and decide whether it is valid. List every core element and required statement the federal rule names, quote the form's wording beside each, and record whether each is present, absent or defective. Check special categories separately, such as psychotherapy notes, substance use disorder records and state-protected results, since a general release may not reach them. Reach a verdict: release, release in part or return. Explain the verdict and what the requester must do to cure any defect. Note how the review is logged. Many sections supply a sample form; if yours passes every test, the review still needs the same evidence. A checklist format with short explanations is common.
How this HI135 Unit 2 example is built
The review opens with a header naming the requester, the patient, the date received and the records held. Six numbered element rows follow, each quoting the form and giving a finding, then three rows for required statements, including the insurer's lawful condition on enrollment. A highlighted line names the real defect. A special categories section explains why psychotherapy notes need their own authorization and why the combined form fails, records that no substance use program records exist, and flags the HIV result. The verdict returns the form with a letter, and a section explains why partial release would be wrong. A log entry closes it. Each finding is worded so a supervisor could act on it without opening the original form.
Reading the HI135 Unit 2 grading rubric
Points for an authorization review in this course typically go first to completeness: every required element and statement checked against the form's own words. Accurate findings, including correct treatment of lawful features such as conditioning for underwriting, earn substantial credit. Instructors reward attention to special categories and correct application of the rule on combined authorizations. A clear verdict with a cure the requester can act on shows practical judgment. Quoting the form beside each finding helps graders verify the reasoning. Organization and accurate citations of the federal rule complete the rubric. Reviews that release on a defective form or skip special categories usually lose the most points.
Common HI135 Unit 2 mistakes, and how to avoid them
Students often check the core elements and stop, missing the required statements or the special categories. Work through all three groups. Another error is treating any conditioning statement as a defect, when insurers may condition enrollment on an authorization for underwriting. Do not try to cure a defect by phone; a defective form needs a new form. Avoid partial release unless the form itself permits it. Quote the form's words rather than summarizing them. Forward the form your instructor supplied and we can prepare the full review, row by row, with a verdict and a cure the requester can follow.
Get an HI135 Unit 2 example written to your instructions
Send the form your instructor supplied, as a file or typed out, together with the Unit 2 instructions and your rubric. A custom review comes back in 24-48h, with the grid built on that exact document. There is no charge for your first sample, and the verdict will follow the form, not the requester's hopes. The paper above is an original model document written by our desk, not a submitted student paper and not an official Purdue University Global document.
More HI135 papers and BS in Health Information Management samples
- HI135 Unit 1: Discussion Board Post
- HI135 Unit 3: Release of Information Case
- HI135 Unit 4: Privacy Notice Comparison
- HI135 Unit 5: Retention Schedule
- HI135 Unit 6: Seminar Reflection
- HI135 Unit 7: Amendment Response Letter
- HI135 Unit 8: Breach Notification Memo
- HI135 Unit 9: Disclosure Log Entry
- HI135 Unit 10: Privacy Policy Draft
HI135 Unit 2 questions, answered
How many required elements should the review list?
Every one the governing rule names. The example lists the federal core elements and the required statements in full rather than a shortened set. Some sections add a state form carrying extra lines, for instance a separate initial beside behavioral health records. Where your scenario names a state, the grid grows to hold those lines as well.
Can a defect be fixed by calling the patient?
Not on the same form. The example treats a missing element as something only a new, complete authorization can cure, and it says so in the decision paragraph. A phone call can explain the problem and prompt a fresh signature, and the review notes that contact, but the original document stays invalid and remains in the file as the reason nothing went out.
What if my instructor's form passes every element?
Then the review says valid and still earns its points through the evidence behind that verdict. This sample is built on a failing form because defects show the reasoning most clearly, but a passing review quotes each element just as carefully, confirms the signer, checks the special categories and ends with the same named reviewer and date.
Where can I find a free HI135 Unit 2 sample paper?
The complete Unit 2 review of the life insurer's authorization, element by element with its verdict, is open on this page.
Can psychotherapy notes be included in a general authorization?
No. The federal rule requires a separate authorization for psychotherapy notes, and combining them with other information makes the authorization defective.