[fight_truth_decay]

Of all the news articles I have read on HIPAA, not one mentioned:

In addition, disclosure of protected health information, without the individual's authorization, is permitted where the circumstances of the emergency implicates law enforcement activities (see 45 CFR 164.512(f)); national security and intelligence activities (see 45 CFR 164.512(k)(2)); or judicial and administrative proceedings (see 45 CFR 164.512(e)).

The new Health Insurance Portabality and Accountability Act passed on April 14th, 2003--Will you really benefit from these new limits on the way personal medical records may be used or disclosed?

Secretary of HHS,Tommy Thompson, thinks so.

"myths and realities about the new hipaa privacy law"

[OXENinFLA]

Bump.

[The Great RJ]

I had to sign a HIPAA form for our cat when I picked up his medications at a local pharmacy (he has hypertension).

[Mr. Bird]

The new Health Insurance Portabality and Accountability Act passed on April 14th, 2003

Actually, no. The final measures took effect on that day. As a patient, you should be more worried about the resources your health care providers are diverting to comply with HIPAA than any disclosures of information. As a matter of law, medical records and histories can only be disclosed without authorization to government agencies if a subpoena is presented. Same as it ever was.

Much of your health information will be distributed to agencies and companies for research and statistical reasons, but that information must not contain any personal identification data. This is not new, or unusual. There is a national tumor registry that keeps track of data on every cancer patient in the country. You could scour their files for years and never determine who had the disease. What HIPAA will do, however, is slow the time it takes you to get referrals, prescriptions, second opinions, and all sorts of routine matters associated with your health. You need to sign a release every time your personal info with identifying data is given to someone other than the primary holder of the information. It's costing millions in compliance. But it's not the end of the world as patients know it.

[Lazamataz]

You highlighted the wrong part of the sentence: "In addition, disclosure of protected health information, without the individual's authorization, is permitted where the circumstances of the emergency implicates law enforcement activities (see 45 CFR 164.512(f)); national security and intelligence activities (see 45 CFR 164.512(k)(2)); or judicial and administrative proceedings (see 45 CFR 164.512(e)).

I don't think this is new, actually. Law enforcement and the courts have always had the ability to subpeona and/or demand all of your information.

[Moonmad27]

I deal with HIPAA at work every day. You, like me, have probably signed a privacy notice warning you about HIPAA rules at the pharmacy, at the dentist, at the hospital, etc. You are asked to specify who can get what info and who can't. To release medical information to anyone other than your doctor or to make payment for the care you want, you additionally have to sign an authorization giving us permission to release the information. We have to keep great track of what info is released. It is nowhere near as scary as the article makes a reader believe and in fact makes info more confidential rather than less.

[Beowulf]

H.I.P.A.A. appears to be the latest in a seemingly endless parade of trial lawyer financial reflief acts passed by the lawyer-dominated legislature.

[iceskater]

Hey AdSimp-
This one's in your bailiwick.

[Paul C. Jesup]

Consider how insane bureaucratic logic (right doesn't know what left hand is doing, and visa versa) is, anyone ever try use HIPAA to get some blackmail material on on the top liberals/socialists in this country?

[Paul C. Jesup]

Considering how insane bureaucratic logic is (right hand doesn't know what left hand is doing, and visa versa), anyone ever try use HIPAA to get some blackmail material on some of the top liberals/socialists in this country?