Posted on 02/12/2004 8:06:48 AM PST by paltz
WASHINGTON - The Justice Department is demanding that at least six hospitals in New York City, Philadelphia and elsewhere turn over hundreds of patient medical records on certain abortions performed there. Lawyers for the Justice Department said that they need the records, but not the patients' names, to defend the government against a lawsuit seeking to overturn a law passed by Congress in November that outlawed what opponents call partial-birth abortions. The lawsuit was brought by a group of doctors at hospitals nationwide who say the law would ban them from performing medically needed abortions. The Justice Department wants to examine the medical histories for what could amount to dozens of the doctors' patients in the last three years to determine, in part, whether the procedure was in fact medically necessary, government lawyers said. But hospital administrators are balking because they say the highly unusual demand would violate the privacy rights of their patients. The standoff has triggered clashing interpretations from federal judges in recent days about whether the Justice Department has a right to see the sensitive files. A federal judge in New York City last week allowed the subpoenas to go forward and threatened to impose penalties -- and perhaps even lift a temporary ban he had imposed on the government's new abortion restrictions -- if the records are not turned over. But the chief federal judge in Chicago threw out the subpoena against Northwestern University Medical Center last week because he said it was a "significant intrusion" on the patients' privacy. A woman's relationship with her doctor and her decision on whether to get an abortion "are issues indisputably of the most sensitive stripe," and they should remain confidential "without the fear of public disclosure," District Judge Charles P. Kocoras wrote. The Justice Department is considering an appeal. The Justice Department's demands for the records are still pending against Columbia Presbyterian Medical Center, Weill Cornell Medical Center and St. Luke's-Roosevelt Hospital Center, all in New York City; the University of Michigan medical center in Ann Arbor, Mich.; and Hahnemann University Hospital in Philadelphia. At least one other undisclosed hospital also appears to have been served with a subpoena, officials said. U.S. District Judge Richard Conway Casey, who issued an order in December enforcing the government subpoenas, said at a hearing last week that the Justice Department had good reason to want the records and he threatened to sanction the opposing lawyers in the case unless the hospitals turn them over. <!-- end body-content --
Funny how this country cowtows to commies. Funny why GW left almost all of Klintoons people in positions of indirect power in D.C. Funny why we can't get any conservatives judges passed with all 3 branches of gov in so-called conservative hands. Ya want to bet that if the dems controlled exactly the same situation that every lib judge would sail thru? Funny,huh? No it's just the ole "Potomic shuffle" that happens in this 2-party cartel.
Ital mine--there is no ID of this group or the docs in it. The reporter glossed over that important lack--makes me think he did it on purpose.
re: A lawyer for the National Abortion Federation, a plaintiff in the lawsuit before Judge Casey, told him that, over all, "many hundreds" of medical documents would be covered. The federation is a trade organization that represents abortion providers.
This is the only plaintiff mentioned.
VERY interesting thing going on here. Needs to be pinged to all interested in abortion issue.
But hospitals have been reluctant to produce the information. The University of Michigan refused several weeks ago based on privacy grounds, spokeswoman Kallie Michels said Wednesday. [snip]Michels said Wednesday that the Justice Department issued a subpoena for records of certain abortions performed by Dr. Timothy Johnson in the last three years. Johnson is one of seven plaintiffs.
Michels said the hospital would consider providing information as long as names and other identifying information is removed. She said the university is waiting to see if the court orders it to provide that information.
She added that Johnson has told Michigan attorneys that he does not think the hospital has performed any of the type abortions at isssue in the last three years. Johnson's attorneys at the American Civil Liberties Union refused to comment on the case Wednesday.[snip]
U.S. District Judge Richard Casey, who is hearing the case in New York, expressed frustration last week at hospitals' reluctance to turn over the records, according to a court transcript of a meeting with attorneys
In response to an attorney for the plaintiffs, who said the plaintiffs cannot force hospitals to surrender the records, Casey said he will "not let the doctors hide behind the shield of the hospital."
"They didn't have to be plaintiffs. They chose to be, and now they are going to get it done," Casey said.
Bet he's really sorry he allowed himself to play plaintiff--would like to know how he managed to get himself in that position! My guess is that he was recruited by activists and didn't realize he'd end up in the glare, and his patients, too.
As for the patient's privacy, I don't see why names would have to be withheld. They can expect to be called as witnesses.
Casey, the judge, talks sense. The case was brought by the plaintiffs, and then these same plaintiffs don't want evidence brought by the defendants? Haw.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.