[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: my last word
On Sat, 11 May 1996 PCK11399@centum.utulsa.edu wrote:
> Mr. Lorton, a contract with an insurance company to indemnify the insured
> for health care costs is NOT "taking the Queen's shilling" nor is it
> asking someone else to "pay for their medical care". I do not believe that
> any policy (contract) with the insurance company allows them to have
> unrestricted access to medical records at this time. If a company included
> that in that contract of indemnification, I would have the right, under
> contract law, to refuse the contract. But under federal law such as is
> being proposed, I will not be able to refuse.
I suggest that you read some insurance contracts (health AND auto!!!).
That is exactly what many say. And if you try to refuse access to your
records, the company is quite likely to deny you coverage. I know people
who have tried, and that was the result. You are welcome to sue your
insurance company on this point, but I hope that you don't get sick in the
four or five years that it takes before you lose your case. You have
virtually no protections today under existing laws and existing policies.
(And if you have an HMO, the insurance company already has all of your
records!).
You may think that the bills being debated today fail to meet your
standards, and you are welcome to that view. But in every case and with
every institition that obtains protected health information, the proposed
bills add limitations, restrictions, and penalties that do not exist
today. Too many people who participate in this listserv think that their
records are protected today, and that simply is not the case. Protections
are few and far between.
Bob
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
+ Robert Gellman rgellman@cais.com +
+ Privacy and Information Policy Consultant +
+ 431 Fifth Street S.E. +
+ Washington, DC 20003 +
+ 202-543-7923 (phone) 202-547-8287 (fax) +
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +