Sorry, but you are wrong about that, as the link I posted shows.
The log is only a log of the names of women taken into the delivery room. That’s it, according to what Zullo said. There’s NO REASON not to release this log book to the Cold Case Posse, given that Zullo also said that it was in the hospital library, which is ordinarily open to the public.
If you follow the link I originally gave to the HHS page, you'll see that HIPAA covers “Individually identifiable health information” which is information, including demographic data, that relates to:
It’s already published information, if it relates to 1961. The Health Dept. ALREADY published it in the newspapers because the HOSPITALS already sent the names to the Health Dept., which PUBLISHED THE NAMES in the newspapers.
In 1961 there was no HIPAAA, and this was legal. The hospital cannot now release ANY protected health information, past or present, except in certain very specific circumstances.
HIPAA also does not protect the names of people currently IN the hospital. Otherwise, of what use is the information desk, where one goes to find out the room of someone s/he wants to visit? Have you ever called the hospital to be connected to a patient’s room? Do they not connect you? That gives out the “name” of the person in the hospital.
You are confusing the meaning of the "directory exception." It provides for a directory of CURRENT patients, providing they allow it, and they must be given the chance to opt out.
The patient must be informed about the information to be included in the directory, and to whom the information may be released, and must have the opportunity to restrict the information or to whom it is disclosed, or opt out of being included in the directory.Since neither 0bama or his mama are CURRENT patients, this is moot.
there’s NO PRIVACY interest in the name of a person who was taken into delivery in 1961. I got the entire medical record, including pathology reports, of an ancestor. The person is deceased. The records were available upon request.
For this legally occur after HIPAA was implemented, you must be the patient's appointed personal representative, executor or next of kin, or have a legitimate medical reason to need this, such as a genetic disease. Otherwise, the hospital who gave you the information is liable for a whopping big fine.
As part of my job, I have to take a course and test on HIPAA compliance periodically. Do the research - patient logs are no longer public information and are HIPAA protected with certain limited exceptions.
The hospital log would NOT be protected by HIPAA. It is standard directory information and FURTHER, the Obamas would have HAD to give permission before the birth could be listed in the newspaper. According to the DOH rules they have to get permission to disclose protected information, but ironically, the only specifically protected information in their rules is the parents’ address. That address was published, hence permission was given, hence that permission was obtained at the hospital and would exempt the Obamas from any disclosure restrictions regarding directory-style information. FURTHER, HIPAA ALLOWS disclosures to law enforcement agents. There is NO LEGAL REASON for the hospital to withhold information that would prove Obama was born there. If Obama wasn’t there, then there would no privacy violation anyway.