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.
The hospital log would NOT be protected by HIPAA.
Sorry, your assertion does not trump the clearly written information on the HHS HIPAA page. A hospital log is protected, because "the provision of health care to the individual," is protected health information. What do you think a log shows? It shows that health care was provided to an individual.
t is standard directory information and FURTHER, the Obamas would have HAD to give permission before the birth could be listed in the newspaper.
The amount of misunderstanding and time confusion here is staggering. Read the directory exception, and you will discover it is for patients CURRENTLY hospitalized, and that the patient must agree to be listed. Are you claiming that it is currently 1961? As to the Obamas giving permission to list in newspapers in 1961, HIPAA did not exist in 1961, so the information was legal to publish then, even if it came from the hospital. After HIPAA, it was no longer legal to disclose that information.
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.
Again, HIPAA wasn't passed at that time. No permission was required then. It is now. And directory information is only permitted for currently hospitalized patients.
FURTHER, HIPAA ALLOWS disclosures to law enforcement agents.
Yes, in specific circumstances only, not just because they "really want to know." Here is what HIPAA says
Law Enforcement Purposes. Covered entities may disclose protected health information to law enforcement officials for law enforcement purposes under the following six circumstances, and subject to specified conditions: (1) as required by law (including court orders, court-ordered warrants, subpoenas) and administrative requests; (2) to identify or locate a suspect, fugitive, material witness, or missing person; (3) in response to a law enforcement official’s request for information about a victim or suspected victim of a crime; (4) to alert law enforcement of a person’s death, if the covered entity suspects that criminal activity caused the death; (5) when a covered entity believes that protected health information is evidence of a crime that occurred on its premises; and (6) by a covered health care provider in a medical emergency not occurring on its premises, when necessary to inform law enforcement about the commission and nature of a crime, the location of the crime or crime victims, and the perpetrator of the crime.Don't think any of those apply to Sheriff Arpaio's investigators.
There is NO LEGAL REASON for the hospital to withhold information that would prove Obama was born there.
Fines up to $250,000 and up to 10 years in prison seem like a darn good reason to me.