CPT letter to Washington Post

[James Love <love@tap.org>]

November 20, 1995

Letters to Editor
Washington Post
1150 15th Street, NW
Washington, DC 20071

Dear Sir or Madam:

     Your November 20, 1995 "Your Medical Files" editorial missed
an important element of the debate over S. 1360, the Medical
Records confidentiality Act.   The bill allows literally millions
government officials, health researchers, insurance, employers
and health industry employees access to databases of your medical
records without consent.

     Critics of S. 1360 not only want to reduce the numbers of
persons with access to these huge databases  -- they are
questioning the more fundamental issue of who controls the
records in the first place.

     S. 1360 says that anyone who provides health insurance may
require disclosure of your medical records into a vast
international system of online medical records.  Critics of S.
1360, including many civil rights, consumer and health care
practitioners, say that doctors and patients should have the
right to withhold information.

     We have suggested language for S.1360 which would eliminate
the right of insurers to put records into database systems
without meaningful, non-coercive consent.  This is opposed by
Equifax, IBM and other firms that do not concede that patients
should be given this choice.

     Sincerely,


     James Love
     Director, Consumer Project on Technology
     P.O. Box 19367, Washington, DC 20036



----------------------------------------------------------------------
James Love, love@tap.org
P.O. Box 19367, Washington, DC 20036; v. 202/387-8030; f. 202/234-5176
Consumer Project on Technology; http://www.essential.org/cpt/cpt.html
Taxpayer Assets Project; http://www.essential.org/tap/tap.html