Additionally, the new law will greatly undermine Americans' health privacy because citizens don't have a right to opt out of the state electronic databases. Nor do they have a right to know whether their personal health data are being accessed by many others, including law-enforcement officials.
At the same time, the existing misnamed federal medical privacy rule (that was established several years ago) permits states and many others to share patients' personal health information without individuals' consent. Yet, many citizens are not being adequately warned about this. When patients receive the federally mandated notices about their so-called "privacy rights" upon visiting health-care providers or picking
up prescriptions, the notices fail to fully inform patients that they do not have the final say in deciding who can access their personal health information. Unfortunately, the federal government has misled Americans into believing that the rule protects their privacy, when it actually facilitates data sharing—without guaranteeing confidentiality.
What can citizens do to prevent erosion of their health privacy? They should work at both the federal and state levels to restore the legal right to give or withhold their consent before personal health information is shared with governments and others. Americans also should uphold the right to contract with and maintain truly confidential relationships with the doctors and other health-care providers of their choice.
Congress and President Bush may have had good intentions in creating state electronic prescription drug monitoring programs. But the new law could interfere greatly with patient-doctor relationships. All told, it would most likely lead to less physician autonomy and more invasions of health privacy for many citizens nationwide.
Note: This article was written by Sue Blevins originally for the Cato Institute and distributed by Knight Ridder/Tribune Information Services.
Sources: