HIPPA and it's disclosure of Orwelian rule

[Docta]

For the second time this year, I have been given a medial privacy statement (mandated by the new HIPPA privacy laws). The one today I actually read waiting to see my doctor.

Towards the back of this pamphlet are "OTHER PERMITTED USES AND DISCLOSURES"

The last one on this list says:

"For military/national security as required by armed forces services and also as necessary for national security, intelligence activities or for protective services for the President and others."

What kind of generalized full sweeping bullshit is that? Crist, this pisses me off. I want to get another copy of the from the pharmacy that I did not read in detail, I bet the government is tracking the drugs I take as well.

[matt]

Working in the health insurance business, specifically with the regulatory agencies, this has been a big deal. We have been operating with HIPAA standards internally for almost two years, so it was no big shock to me. Having HIPAA crammed down my throat recently has made me pretty much numb to it. It is supposed to be a more strict way of protecting your right to privacy, including releasing information to third-parties.

I went to the doctor last Monday when it went into effect and got to see it in action from another angle, from an elderly insured's point of view. Here's what got me questioning the whol law:

A man and a woman, both in their late 70's, walk into the doctor's office for the first time. He is there for the appointment. I will assume he was with his wife, but she could be a complete stranger for all I (or the doctor for that matter) know. He goes throught he usual filling out of paperwork and turns it all in. His female companion fills out the paperwork for him since he can't understand all of the "red tape" questions he's being asked about his health. The nurse at the window reads the one-line privacy statemnt to him and tells him to check "yes" or "no". His response to her is "This is my first time here. I don't understand any of this" and mumbled back to his seat. He gave the privacy statement to his companion, who without saying a word, marked something on the paper and signed a name, then had him return it to the window. There was no more discussion about it.

When his name was called for him to go back, he told her to stay in the waiting room, that he didn't think he wanted her in the exam room with him.

What if she checked "yes" to release information to a third-party, and he did not want authorize release of his personal health information?

[matt]

A friend sent this to me today. Any truth to it?


Your Credit: Personal Information goes public Starting July 1st,
2003, the four major credit bureaus in the US (Equifax, etc.) will be allowed to release credit info, mailing addresses, phone numbers, etc., to ANYONE who requests it. If you do not want to be included in this release of your personal information, you can call 1-888-567-8688. Once the message starts you will want option #2 (even though option #1 refers to this email, push #2) and then option #3.

Be sure to listen closely, the first option is only for a two-year
period. Make sure you wait until they prompt for the third option,
which opts you out PERMANENTLY. You should receive their paperwork inthe mail confirming the "opting out" in less than one week after making the call.

[IPrayForSound]

It's not real (http://www.equifax.com/corp/pressroom/pressreleases/2003/2003_04_16.shtml)