Quote:
Originally posted by bilmore
Just curious, but is this a records-privacy fight, or an abortion-issue fight? I've subpoena'ed medrecs with the ID info blocked, with no real problem - if there's no danger of finding out who they are, and the request goes to issues having to do with facilities or procedures, what's the beef? Seems to me, the heart of the assertions in the challenge has to do with medical necessity, and that should be open to review, right? How else to examine the issue? And, where do you see a conflict if ID info is out?
|
My beef is regarding the medical records. I'm not pissed off that the DoJ is trying to get records that it thinks may be helpful to its case. I'm pissed because of the quoted material about individuals not having an expectation of privacy with regard to medical records.
As for your questions, I think that the hosptials are stating that it's impossible in some of these cases to remove the identifying information, because the cases are so unique. I don't see a conflict if the identifying information is removed, but I'd be very wary of exposing myself to a complaint from the patient if I disclosed too much information.
I haven't seen the physicians' response but I think that they're arguing that they can be cross examined, and peer reviewed literature can be brought into evidence. The District Court Judge in Illinois seemed to imply that this evidence is being asked for impeachment purposes, and I would think that impeachment evidence should be given greater scrutiny than direct fact evidence. Given the assertion of medical necessity, it probably would be useful to have a few medical records showing medical necessity. I imagine that the plaintiffs do have and have produced a couple of these records.
