internetworkers AT lists.ibiblio.org
Subject: Internetworkers: http://www.ibiblio.org/internetworkers/
List archive
- From: Kate Johnson <johnk AT ils.unc.edu>
- To: internetworkers AT franklin.metalab.unc.edu, spam AT lambada.oit.unc.edu
- Subject: Changes in Healthcare Data Privacy Rules
- Date: Thu, 28 Mar 2002 17:40:54 -0500 (EST)
Dear all:
Recent proposed changes, to the HIPAA medical privacy regulations,
eliminate the requirement that patients consent to the disclosure of their
private health information. In addition, activities that many would
consider marketing would be allowed by health plans, providers, drug
stores, and others.
NY Times article on this below.
Comments to the Department of Health and Human Services can be made
via
this URL: http://www.hhs.gov/ocr/hipaa/
Bush Acts to Drop Core Privacy Rule on Medical Data
March 22, 2002
By ROBERT PEAR
WASHINGTON, March 21 - The Bush administration today
proposed dropping a requirement at the heart of federal
rules that protect the privacy of medical records. It said
doctors and hospitals should not have to obtain consent
from patients before using or disclosing medical
information for the purpose of treatment or reimbursement.
The proposal, favored by the health care industry, was
announced by Tommy G. Thompson, the secretary of health and
human services, who said the process of obtaining consent
could have "serious unintended consequences" and could
impair access to quality health care.
The sweeping privacy rules were issued by President Bill
Clinton in December 2000. When Mr. Bush allowed them to
take effect last April, consumer advocates cheered, while
much of the health care industry expressed dismay.
Today's proposal would repeal a provision widely viewed as
the core of the Clinton rules: a requirement that doctors,
hospitals and other health care providers obtain written
consent from patients before using or disclosing medical
information for treatment, the payment of claims or any of
a long list of "health care operations," like setting
insurance premiums and measuring the competence of doctors.
The proposal is to be published in the Federal Register
next week, with 30 days for public comment. The government
will consider the comments and then issue a final rule,
with the force of law.
Secretary Thompson said he wanted to remove the consent
requirements because he believed they could delay care.
Pharmacists and hospitals had expressed the same concern.
Drugstores said they could not fill prescriptions phoned in
by a doctor for pick-up by a patient's relative or
neighbor. Hospitals said they could not schedule medical
procedures until the patient had read a privacy notice and
signed a consent form.
Hospitals and insurance companies praised today's proposal
as a victory for common sense, but consumer advocates and
Democratic members of Congress denounced it as a threat to
privacy.
"In general, this is great for the health care industry,"
said Elisabeth Belmont, corporate counsel for Maine Health,
which operates seven hospitals, a nursing home and a home
health agency in Maine. Mary R. Grealy, president of the
Health Care Leadership Council, which represents drug
makers, drugstores, insurers and hospitals, said: "The new
proposal strikes an appropriate balance. It's a workable
compromise."
But Janlori Goldman, coordinator of the Consumer Coalition
for Health Privacy, an alliance of more than 100 groups
favoring patients' rights, said the administration was
proposing "a destructive change."
Representative Edward J. Markey, Democrat of Massachusetts,
said: "By stripping the consent requirement from the health
privacy rule, the Bush administration strips patients of
the fundamental right to give their consent before their
health information is used or disclosed. The
administration's proposal throws the baby away with the
bath water."
Senator Edward M. Kennedy, Democrat of Massachusetts, said
he was "very concerned" because he believed that "an
individual should have to give permission before medical
information is disclosed."
The Bush administration denied that it was eviscerating
privacy protections. "The president believes strongly in
the need for federal protections to ensure patient privacy,
and the changes we are proposing today will allow us to
deliver strong protections for personal medical information
while improving access to care," Mr. Thompson said.
Under the rules, doctors and other health care providers
would still have to notify patients of their rights and the
providers' disclosure policies. Patients would be asked to
acknowledge in writing that they had received such notice,
but could receive care without the acknowledgment.
Ms. Goldman, director of the Health Privacy Project at
Georgetown University, said: "It's absurd to suggest that a
notice serves the same purpose as consent. Signing the
consent makes it more likely that people will understand
their rights."
Some parts of the Clinton rules would survive the changes
proposed by the Bush administration. Patients would, for
example, have a federal right to inspect and copy their
records and could propose corrections.
Congress could try to set privacy standards by law,
overriding decisions by the Bush administration. But that
appears unlikely. Under a 1996 law, Congress instructed the
secretary of health and human services to issue rules on
medical privacy in the absence of action by Congress, and
lawmakers have never been able to agree on standards.
In its proposal today, the Bush administration tries to
ensure that parents have "appropriate access" to medical
records of their children, including information about
mental health, abortion and treatment for drug and alcohol
abuse. The Clinton rules "may have unintentionally limited
parents' access to their child's medical records," the Bush
administration said. The proposal makes clear that state
law governs disclosures to parents.
The Bush proposal would also relax some consent
requirements that medical researchers saw as particularly
onerous.
The rules, the first comprehensive federal standards for
medical privacy, affect virtually every doctor, patient,
hospital, pharmacy and health plan in the United States.
Health care providers and insurers must comply by April 14,
2003. Anyone who violates the rules after that date will be
subject to civil and criminal penalties, including a
$250,000 fine and 10 years in prison for the most serious
violations.
When Mr. Clinton issued the rules in December 2000, he
described them as "the most sweeping privacy protections
ever written." Mr. Bush took political credit for accepting
those rules last April. White House officials said Mr. Bush
would back a wide range of privacy protections for
consumers, even if he had to defy his usual business
allies.
The White House wanted to avoid the political embarrassment
Mr. Bush suffered when he altered Clinton policies on
arsenic levels in drinking water, global warming, ergonomic
rules and the contamination of school lunch meat with
salmonella. But after studying the medical privacy rules
and listening to the concerns of companies in the health
care industry, the administration concluded that major
provisions of the Clinton rules were unworkable.
- Changes in Healthcare Data Privacy Rules, Kate Johnson, 03/28/2002
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.