Medical Records Privacy?

[bradedit]

U.S. Attorney General John Ashcroft has subpoenaed the medical records of women in several states,including Illinois and New York, who underwent late-term abortions when the controversial procedure was legal. Ashcroft claims he needs the records to defend the late-term abortion bill passed by Congress last fall.

I'm curious as to what you all think about this? Do we have any privacy anymore??

[Taxman]

Are the records going to be anonymous or are they the raw records?

[bradedit]

From what I understand no names will be published I don't think medical records can be anonymous when subpoened, can they??

[Pipanella]

I would think that the patients would have to give their permission to have their records released. I'm not sure if HIPAA laws are retro-active, but that's what would happen today. Even with permission, only records that are necessary for the treatment of the patient are allowed to be released.

So, if the government is allowed to get into these records, it makes it kind of hypocritical, doesn't it? The government was who established the HIPAA laws in the first place. Maybe they are exempt???

[crazytimes]

I think I read somewhere it was the Bush administration that increased privacy on these records in the first place!

[Taxman]

Originally Posted by bradedit

From what I understand no names will be published I don't think medical records can be anonymous when subpoened, can they??

That's why I was asking if it was the raw records or not that were subpoenaed. If it's the raw records, then that's a problem. If it's not, then all they're going to get is (in essence) "X number of patients underwent XYZ procedure". Not a big deal in that case.

[Pipanella]

Originally Posted by crazytimes

I think I read somewhere it was the Bush administration that increased privacy on these records in the first place!

Nope, not Bush. It was enacted during the Clinton administration.

Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (HIPAA)

The federal law, known as HIPAA legislation, was enacted by Congress August 21, 1996, to encourage the development of health information systems that would enable the electronic exchange of health care information in a private and secure way. Congress charged the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) to develop regulations for the use of electronic transaction standards, privacy, security, uniform identification numbers for physicians, health plans, and purchasers of health care, and the like.

[Rockabillie]

Originally Posted by Taxman

"X number of patients underwent XYZ procedure". Not a big deal in that case.

That's already done on a state by state basis. You can get an annual report from any state that lists all deaths by age, all live births with age of mother, all stillbirths, and all abortions. So that's already the norm. What they're pushing for is more information: who what where when. And that is frightening.

[Taxman]

Can they get the information broken down past the state level? We need more information about just what Ashcroft is doing before we can have an informed opinion. Has anyone seen an article on this?

[bradedit]

I have read many articles about it, none that youwould consider reliable so I will not link them here. DH being in the medical field this relates to his job, What will be next will they release all the men with who have erectile dysfuntion.

[Pipanella]

Originally Posted by Taxman

Can they get the information broken down past the state level? We need more information about just what Ashcroft is doing before we can have an informed opinion. Has anyone seen an article on this?

[Only registered and activated users can see links. Either login above or Register Now]

Northwestern escapes DOJ subpoena
Judge denies Ashcroft's request for patient medical records

By Mark Taylor

A move by U.S. Attorney General John Ashcroft to subpoena the medical records of 40 patients who received so-called partial-birth abortions at Northwestern Memorial Hospital in Chicago was halted—at least temporarily—when a Chicago federal judge quashed the information request.
The ruling is the first in a series of subpoenas by the U.S. Justice Department seeking the medical records of patients from seven physicians and at least five hospitals, Crain's sister publication Modern Healthcare has learned. Besides Northwestern, Mr. Ashcroft is seeking patient records from University of Michigan Hospitals and Health Centers in Ann Arbor; Hahnemann University Hospital in Philadelphia, owned by Tenet Healthcare Corp.; Columbia Presbyterian Medical Center and Weill Cornell Medical Center of New York Presbyterian Hospital both of which are part of the New York-Presbyterian Healthcare System; and an unidentified San Francisco-area hospital.

In a 16-page decision, U.S. Chief District Judge Charles Kocoras denied the government’s request to obtain patient medical records from Northwestern, citing the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (HIPAA) and Illinois’ medical privacy law.
Northwestern received the subpoena in December, a month after obstetrician/gynecologist Cassing Hammond, a member of Northwestern’s staff and medical school faculty, was served with subpoenas seeking his patient records. Hammond is one of seven doctors and three groups who has challenged the constitutionality of the Partial Birth Abortion Ban Act of 2003. The American Civil Liberties Union is representing the National Abortion Federation; Planned Parenthood and the Center for Reproductive Rights, which are all filing challenges to the law. A hearing for all of the challenges has been scheduled for March 29 in U.S. District Court in New York.

Dr. Hammond refused comment last week. His case is pending.

Sources at New York Presbyterian and Hahnemann who requested anonymity confirmed the subpoenas at those hospitals. The University of Michigan had not returned calls for comment at deadline.

In his decision, Judge Kocoras said the records “appear to have been sought for the purpose of testing the assertions in Dr. Hammond’s declarations. At best, the government is seeking possible impeachment material.”

While the Justice Department has said it is not seeking information that would identify the patients, that did not persuade Judge Kocoras.

A department spokeswoman Monica Goodling said the department does not comment on ongoing litigation but said, “We are reviewing the ruling in light of our commitment to defending the law banning partial-birth abortions.”

Northwestern spokeswoman Kelly Sullivan said that HIPAA and the Illinois law required the hospital to protect the privacy and confidentiality of patient records. “Patients are not a party to the litigation and thus (Northwestern) cannot produce the medical records of nonparties,” Ms. Sullivan said. “The judge agreed and quashed the subpoena request.”

Alicia Mitchell, a spokeswoman for the American Hospital Assn., said the group is not aware of the patient records subpoenas. “But we assume that HIPAA medical records privacy protections apply equally to everyone,” Ms. Mitchell said.

[Taxman]

While the Justice Department has said it is not seeking information that would identify the patients...

That's what I thought. Not exactly a witch hunt...

[Rockabillie]

Originally Posted by Taxman

Can they get the information broken down past the state level?

I *think* so. I think the report is released by the state and there's a summary page for the whole state and then pages for each city and county. It is total numbers for large areas, though, no details about specific people.

The government wants to read specific patients' files, but with the name blacked out. So it IS someone's private medical file, but theoretically no one can find out whose.

I don't know if it's a witchhunt or not. But our Constitution is based on a good deal of Individual rights. The intrusion doesn't have to be BAD to be wrong. The whole ideal of the Government intruding in our private lives is what the Constitution is supposed to protect us from. If we have to justify if our activity is good or bad or if the government's intrusion is good or bad, it misses the point that it isn't the goverment's job to decide.

[Taxman]

Maybe I'll go Googling about this. Still too murky to make an informed opinion...

[Pipanella]

Originally Posted by Taxman

Maybe I'll go Googling about this. Still too murky to make an informed opinion...

Here's the full text of the judge's ruling:

[Only registered and activated users can see links. Either login above or Register Now]