Quote:
Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield
In that instance, why would a subpoena be needed? If the PI lawyer represents the Plaintiff/Patient, all he needs to submit is a medical records request on behalf of the Plaintiff/Patient.
Under the TX law, the Patient is a third party to a lawsuit between the abortion provider and a Plaintiff suing the provider. The Plaintiff there (let's call him "Shitball," because that fits) sues the provider and then demands the records of a third party patient whom he alleges received an abortion.
The provider has to notify the Patient before turning those over. Patient then objects to disclosure of private information in a case in which Patient is not even a party.
Do you see a judge overruling the privacy interests of a third party - privacy interests in the most personal and sensitive forms of information imaginable - to satisfy discovery requests from a litigant suing a third party under a statute nakedly enacted for purely political purposes over broad public objection?
|
I handle subpoenas /requests for one of our facilities, and most of the time plaintiffs just use authorizations to get their own records. Sometimes they'll go the subpoena route just to get the affidavit, but usually it's cheaper/easier just do to a request. And they don't end up fighting with medical records departments (me) about letters of assurance, which I still insist upon even if the lawyer is representing the patient.
Sometimes the judge overrules. Most of the time (in my experience, anyways) the patient doesn't bother to object. I suspect because the patients don't have lawyers/don't know how. It doesn't happen very often where third party records are requested. Usually products liability cases or the like, but even then the lawyers need to have identified the third party and have a sense of what was going on with them.
Note: I do get a lot of third party in the case of medical board subpoenas, but the healthcare oversight exception to HIPAA applies in those instances and usually the patient is the person who brought the complaint, anyways. And of course, criminal subpoenas, which are in the law enforcement section of HIPAA and don't require the letter of assurance, at least on the prosecution side.
If anyone is ever interested in the exceptions to HIPAA 45 CFR 164.512 is the place to go for most of them.
As for "how will judges react", I suspect that the authors/advocates of this bill know EXACTLY which courts to file the suits in and those judges are geared up and raring to go against baby killers and their assistants.
I'm frankly more worried about how OB/GYNs will react. More bad baby cases. More maternal fatalities. Maternal Fetal Medicine folks leaving the state because the risk of practicing in that area is just not worth it. Residency programs losing their ACOG accreditation because they can't train on abortion, therefore not attracting good OB/GYN residents to the state.
The authors of this bill Do. Not. Give. A. Shit. about any of this.
Threaded Mode