[Med-privacy] Gov. Health IT article

[Peter Marshall]

--Apple-Mail-4-652393237
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset=WINDOWS-1252;
	format=flowed

Health IT lawmakers study privacy
Legislators are concerned about protecting privacy as they craft=20
federal laws.
=A0
=A0
  BY  Nancy Ferris
  Published on June 19, 2006



Privacy has become the most troublesome issue for legislators trying to=20=

craft a federal law to promote health information technology.

Almost everyone who spoke at a hearing of the House Energy and Commerce=20=

Committee=92s Health Subcommittee in March expressed concerns about=20
protecting the privacy of patients=92 information. But they had =
different=20
views on how to ensure the confidentiality of the records.

The hearing also revealed divisions on anti-kickback proposals and=20
other elements of pending legislation.

It was the first hearing on the Health IT Promotion Act of 2005, which=20=

Rep. Nancy Johnson (R-Conn.) introduced in October 2005 and which=20
remains pending. The subcommittee=92s chairman, Rep. Nathan Deal =
(R-Ga.),=20
is a co-sponsor of the bill.

In his introductory remarks, Deal urged his colleagues to be cautious=20
of sweeping legislative proposals that might interfere with the natural=20=

progress of health IT in the marketplace. Deal called for strong but=20
practical privacy protections.

=93There must be adequate protections for patient privacy,=94 said Rep.=20=

Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio), the subcommittee=92s ranking member. =93We=92ve =
all=20
read the stories about stolen bank records in the last few months.=20
Imagine if they were stolen medical records.=94

Rep. Henry Waxman (D-Calif.) said he was concerned that existing=20
privacy protections under the Health Insurance Portability and=20
Accountability Act (HIPAA) of 1996 do not apply to many of the people=20
with access to health records.

Johnson and Deal=92s bill would establish federal privacy protections=20
that could override the patchwork of state privacy laws. Many of those=20=

laws are more stringent than HIPAA and other federal privacy rules, and=20=

rules in one state often conflict with those in another state.

The override provision drew praise from Don Detmer, president of the=20
American Medical Informatics Association; Alan Mertz, president of the=20=

American Clinical Laboratory Association; and others. =93Personally, I=20=

don=92t see how we can get to the common standards and interoperability=20=

that underlie the widespread adoption of electronic health records=20
without federal pre-emption of conflicting state laws,=94 Detmer said.

But strong criticism came from Bill Vaughan, senior policy analyst at=20
the Consumers Union, and James Pyles, a lawyer representing the=20
American Psychoanalytic Association.

They said HIPAA protections are inadequate and state laws often provide=20=

necessary privacy protection.

=93Health IT creates the potential for breaches of health information=20
privacy on a scale previously unimaginable,=94 Pyles said. =93Once =
health=20
information is disclosed electronically, it cannot be recovered.=94

--Apple-Mail-4-652393237
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Type: text/enriched;
	charset=WINDOWS-1252

<bold><fontfamily><param>Helvetica</param><bigger><bigger><bigger>Health
IT lawmakers study privacy

</bigger></bigger><x-tad-bigger>Legislators are concerned about
protecting privacy as they craft federal laws.

=
</x-tad-bigger></bigger></fontfamily></bold><fontfamily><param>Helvetica</=
param><smaller>=A0

=A0

<bold><color><param>3333,3333,3333</param><x-tad-smaller> BY=20
=
</x-tad-smaller></color><color><param>0000,3333,9999</param><x-tad-smaller=
>Nancy
Ferris</x-tad-smaller></color><x-tad-smaller>

</x-tad-smaller><color><param>3333,3333,3333</param><x-tad-smaller>
Published on June 19, 2006 </x-tad-smaller></color><x-tad-smaller>




</x-tad-smaller></bold>Privacy has become the most troublesome issue
for legislators trying to craft a federal law to promote health
information technology.


Almost everyone who spoke at a hearing of the House Energy and
Commerce Committee=92s Health Subcommittee in March expressed concerns
about protecting the privacy of patients=92 information. But they had
different views on how to ensure the confidentiality of the records.


The hearing also revealed divisions on anti-kickback proposals and
other elements of pending legislation.


It was the first hearing on the Health IT Promotion Act of 2005, which
Rep. Nancy Johnson (R-Conn.) introduced in October 2005 and which
remains pending. The subcommittee=92s chairman, Rep. Nathan Deal
(R-Ga.), is a co-sponsor of the bill.


In his introductory remarks, Deal urged his colleagues to be cautious
of sweeping legislative proposals that might interfere with the
natural progress of health IT in the marketplace. Deal called for
strong but practical privacy protections.


=93There must be adequate protections for patient privacy,=94 said Rep.
Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio), the subcommittee=92s ranking member. =93We=92ve =
all
read the stories about stolen bank records in the last few months.
Imagine if they were stolen medical records.=94


Rep. Henry Waxman (D-Calif.) said he was concerned that existing
privacy protections under the Health Insurance Portability and
Accountability Act (HIPAA) of 1996 do not apply to many of the people
with access to health records.


Johnson and Deal=92s bill would establish federal privacy protections
that could override the patchwork of state privacy laws. Many of those
laws are more stringent than HIPAA and other federal privacy rules,
and rules in one state often conflict with those in another state.


The override provision drew praise from Don Detmer, president of the
American Medical Informatics Association; Alan Mertz, president of the
American Clinical Laboratory Association; and others. =93Personally, I
don=92t see how we can get to the common standards and interoperability
that underlie the widespread adoption of electronic health records
without federal pre-emption of conflicting state laws,=94 Detmer said.


But strong criticism came from Bill Vaughan, senior policy analyst at
the Consumers Union, and James Pyles, a lawyer representing the
American Psychoanalytic Association.


They said HIPAA protections are inadequate and state laws often
provide necessary privacy protection.


=93Health IT creates the potential for breaches of health information
privacy on a scale previously unimaginable,=94 Pyles said. =93Once =
health
information is disclosed electronically, it cannot be recovered.=94

</smaller></fontfamily>=

--Apple-Mail-4-652393237--