Court declares open season on private medical records

[Steelangel]

WESTON A. PRICE FOUNDATION
INFORMATION ALERT
October 10, 2004

COURT DECLARES OPEN SEASON ON PRIVATE MEDICAL RECORDS

On Wednesday October 6, the District Court of Appeals, Fourth District,
Florida, ruled against Rush Limbaugh in his bid to keep his medical
records private after the State of Florida seized them in a fishing
expedition looking for evidence of "doctor-shopping."

The American Association of Physicians and Surgeons (AAPS) filed an
amicus curie brief in that case since it affects the privacy of all
medical records and the ability of the government to seize them with just the
most slender of threads of "probable cause."

AAPS General Counsel Andrew Schlafly says it signals an "open season on
everyone's medical records and everyone in the country needs to start
playing hide and seek with their doctor."

Last April, AAPS ran a national newspaper ad in USA Today and others
with a masked doctor, warning patients, "You have the right to remain
silent...." It seems that dire prediction is now coming true.

"We'd better tell doctors to Mirandize every patient - tell them 'You
have the right to remain silent' - because this is the end of privacy in
medical records. The message to patients is clear: anything you tell
your doctor can and will be used against you," warns Mr. Schlafly.

Rush Limbaugh has not been charged with a crime, and yet the State of
Florida seized access to many of his highly personal medical records,
without prior notice. The State even grabbed medical records unrelated
to its investigation.

This ruling could not come at a worse time, as Senators Bill Frist and
Hillary Clinton have banded together to promote a federal plan towards
electronic databases of all patients

Read the entire AAPS statement, the court's ruling and the AAPS brief
at http://en.groundspring.org/EmailNow/pub.php?module=URLTracker&cmd=track&j=10219531&u=88170.

Source: http://www.westonaprice.org


Another attack on our citizen's rights. Nothing news..

[Skittles]

1. I don't like this

surely there is a way to handle the legal matter without the invasion of privacy. Perhaps if only doctors could review the records and give the authorities ONLY WHAT THEY NEED TO KNOW - dates, times, whatever - without revealing medical details.

[annabanana]

3. I believe the ACLU was on Limby's side on this one.

And I must admit......as much as I despise the jerk, unencumbered rummaging around in medical records should be discouraged.

[Warpy]

2. You can't hide evidence of a crime by saying your records are

private, when it's those records that have tracked the progress of your crime. They really don't give a rip what his temperature and blood pressure are. They're only concerned with how many doctors are out there with charts indicating he visited them looking for more narcotics.

This is unlikely a fishing expedition. Pharmacy records are routinely scanned for red flags of multiple narcotics prescriptions from different doctors. His medical records will simply be more evidence, plus they'll also tell the prosecution whether or not there was an actual underlying condition that needed to be treated.

Suburban pillheads usually go from a legitimate prescription to thinking if one pill helps, two pill will cure to finding extra doctors for when the prescriptions run out early to buying them illegally. That seems to be what Lamebawl has done.

Personally, I think mild narcotics should be OTC. People should be empowered to treat their own damn pain, and there is no upper limit for narcotic dosage. However, Lamebawl broke a law he vehemently and rudely supported for the rest of us, and I hope they throw the book at him.

[Terran]

4. I don't agree.

I do agree medical records generally should be kept carefully confidential, but not in the case where there's a reasonable suspicion of a violation of the law. In Limbaugh's case, there was quite a bit more than a "slender thread" of probable cause. The pharmacy records (as seen here on DU last week) reveal a very strong circumstantial case of violation of state and federal drug laws, by both Limbaugh and the physicians involved, and the authorities acted on that information--they needed to see Limbaugh's records to know. To not do so would have been a dereliction of their duty. Especially where the doctors are concerned, it's all to the public good to have crooked physicians removed from practice, which I'll bet will happen to at least one the four that prescribed to Limbaugh.

Our legal system makes it very difficult to obtain such records for a criminal (as opposed to say an administrative) investigation, and that's how it should be.

[Lefty48197]

5. Your source is suspect:

I'm not ready to indict the AAPS yet, but their website sure makes it sound like they have a right wing agenda to promote. With that in mind, it's not surprising that they would defend Rush Limbaugh.
A far better source for reporting this story might have been the ACLU website. They too are defending Limbaugh (they're putting their money where their mouth is), but the ACLU clearly does not have any right wing agenda.
As evidence of what I consider to be AAPS' right wing bias, I noticed that they posted a story titled, "Why the U.S. should reject socialized medicine (a.k.a. "Single Payer) and restore private medicine"
They even have a petition that we can all sign urging the federal government to REJECT their so-called "socialized medicine".
Here's an excerpt from a Q&A session on the AAPS website:

"9. Isn't it just right for a civilized country to provide health coverage for all?

Is it right to force people to pay for other people's coverage while forbidding them, as in Canada, to use their own earnings to buy timely, lifesaving care for themselves and their loved ones? Is it right to force people into government dependency?

More compulsory government “coverage” displaces and erodes the voluntary ethic of caring for one's neighbors, which is the true sign of a civilized society.

10. Haven't other Western countries proved the advantages of national health insurance or “single payer”?

The U.S. may still talk about expanding taxpayer-funded benefits, but many European governments, including France and Germany, have no choice but to start rolling them back. For a cinematographer's look at the Canadian system, go to see The Barbarian Invasion, an award-winning movie about end-of-life issues, which is partly set in a Canadian hospital. The beds in the hallway, closed floors, delays, and pervasive corruption are taken for granted by the protagonists.

And don't forget the record of our very own single payer plan called Medicare, projected to bankrupt our own federal treasury in a few years."

The last line sounds a lot like the Team Bush's Department of Spin.

While it is true that medical privacy is a very important issue, it's also important that we understand the bias of those that we are listening to.

[Steelangel]

6. The source

Edit: Ohhh, you were talking about AAPS. my bad.. </edit>

Weston A Price is a foundation that is not funded or owned by rightwing morons. Trust me. They warned us frequently about organic foods and other things. They installed the 'watchdogs' and keep eyes on Dubya & his admin concerning about organic foods and other organic issues.

So far, they did well.. Weston A Price and our people just saved Americans' kids from 'pre-screening' to detect if they need the drugs or not.. if they do then they will use the governments' power to force the drugs on our kids. Would anyone with brains like that if the bill ever pass? Anyway Weston A Price alerted us and got many letters from us to challenge and dismissed the bill (which brought up by republicanscums of course).

There are many more things that they did for us that at least 98% of americans does not aware or not care.

Weston A Price foundation is here to defend our organic foods rights. I don't care if anyone here don't believe me, at least they are here to defend my choice to buy the organic foods so I am happy :)

Also Weston A Price alerted us about that privacy medical records because it will happen to our records in future if they act like that. That's only reason for them to warn us that we may will lose our private to that. Rightwing thing? I doubt.. Rightwing would love to have our private rights revoked.