Re: Rel. of Information - Secondary release (fwd)

[James Brady <jbrady@freenet.columbus.oh.us>]

  Jim typing at all.
  
  ---------- Forwarded message ----------
  Date: Mon, 5 Aug 1996 19:36:55 -0500
  From: James Brady <jbrady@freenet.columbus.oh.us>
  To: jbrady@freenet.columbus.oh.us
  Subject: Re: Rel. of Information - Secondary release
  
  
  I agree your method is safe.
  
  What if the patient's records at the first facility are no longer readily
  available?  That is not uncommon.
  
  What if the "facility" were not a clinic but another physician in private
  practice who has died ... and the children threw the charts in a garage in
  random order?  That HAS happened. 
  
  What if the physician went out of sync; the records are in a building
  padlocked by the Fed's; the physician has no idea whether the records are
  somewhere in that building, and if so, where.  That HAS happened. 
  
  If the patient and the recipient of the records have no objection to the
  second custodian sending copies of the first custodian's records (with the
  proper disclaimer/caveat), why on earth would the second custodian, a
  neutral conduit of data, have an objection?
  
  Who usually suffers with the delay?  The patient ... the one being guarded
  so well.
  
  James Brady, typing for Jim, etc.
  
  jbrady@freenet.columbus.oh.us