|
Your
Confidential Medical Records Are an Open Book
Phil Brennan,
NewsMax.com
Monday, July 8, 2002
Thanks to new federal regulations designed by ex-President Clinton
and backed by President Bush, all kinds of people can now access your
most private medical records without your say-so, just as NewsMax.com
repeatedly warned.
A lawsuit has revealed that a pharmacy company got its hands on the
medical records of a woman and sent her junk mail containing samples of
one of its drug products, Prozac Weekly, as a remedy for her medical
problem; depression.
The lawsuit made Page One of the New York Times this weekend. Why the
surprise? This is exactly the sort of privacy invasion NewsMax.com
warned about just before the new so-called medical privacy regulations
went into effect earlier this year.
In a March 13, 2001, heads-up, NewsMax.com reported that the
regulation allegedly intended to improve the confidentiality of medical
records contains a sleeper provision that gives health care providers
the right to sell a person's confidential medical information to
marketing firms and drug companies.
Under the proposal, NewsMax warned, doctors can even share the
information with a "business partner," who can conduct marketing on
behalf of a provider.
"It's perfectly legal under the rule for someone to knock on your
door and say, 'I've learned from your doctor you have hemorrhoids; would
you like to buy this treatment?' " said Bob Gellman, a medical privacy
consultant and former congressional staffer.
"You can only opt out after you have been marketed to. I've been
working on this issue for 20 years, and it's the worst anti-privacy
thing I've seen."
President Bush told Health and Human Services Secretary Tommy
Thompson to allow the new rules to go into effect in April last year
despite a storm of protests including the tens of thousands of readers
who signed a NewsMax.com petition opposing the Clinton regulations.
In the new lawsuit the unidentified plaintiff alleged she got the
Prozac, which is used to treat anxiety and depression, in a
hand-addressed manila envelope from a Walgreen's drugstore that
contained a "Dear Patient" form letter which said "Enclosed you will
find a free one-month trial of Prozac Weekly. Congratulations on being
one step [closer] to full recovery."
The form letter appeared to have been written by a Lilly sales
representative and was signed by the plaintiff's doctor and two other
local doctors.
"We are very excited to be able to offer you a more convenient way to
take your antidepressant medication," the letter said. "If you wish to
try Prozac Weekly, stop your antidepressant one day before starting
Prozac Weekly, then take Prozac Weekly once a week thereafter."
According to the New York Times' Adam Liptak, that mailing angered the
plaintiff, "a 59-year-old home caregiver who filed a class-action
lawsuit this week in a state court in Fort Lauderdale, Florida."
"They're going after me because I have a problem," the woman, told
the Times.
She agreed to an interview in her lawyer's office, providing her name
would not be revealed. "It bothers me to think that somebody could get
into my medical records and start sending me dangerous medications."
The lawsuit says the plaintiff, identified only as S.K., has had a
diagnosis of depression, "which she maintains in the strictest of
confidence due to potential public embarrassment and employment
repercussions." It states that she did not have a prescription for
Prozac.
"I hadn't been using Prozac for seven years or better," she told the
Times. "It was a matter of a few months. It didn't agree with me."
Misuse of Records Charged
The lawsuit names Walgreen's, a local hospital, three doctors and Eli
Lilly, which makes Prozac, charging they misused patients' medical
records and invaded their privacy. It also accused Walgreen's and the
drug company "of engaging in the unauthorized practice of medicine," the
Times reported
The plaintiffs' lawyers told the Times they didn't know how many
people in addition to their client received the junk mailings. "It could
be anywhere from several dozen to several thousand," Gary M. Farmer Jr.,
one of the lawyers, told the Times.
Dr. Lise Lambert, one of the doctors who signed the "Dear Patient"
letter and the plaintiff's physician, is a defendant in the suit. She
did not return the Times' calls and her medical group referred the
Times' questions to Holy Cross Hospital, which is also named as a
defendant.
A hospital spokeswoman said the hospital did not comment on matters
in litigation. In early June the hospital issued a statement to the Fort
Lauderdale Sun-Sentinel that said, "This particular effort was the
result of well-intentioned, respected physicians being given an
opportunity to arrange for some of their patients to receive sample
medications, at no cost, through proper, licensed pharmacy channels."
The plaintiff told the Times that Dr. Lambert admitted signing blank
letterhead, which the Lilly representative added text to and delivered
to the drugstore for mailing. Whether or not Dr. Lambert reviewed the
letter before signing, the mailing was improper, Dr. David L. Pearle, a
professor of medicine at Georgetown University, told the Times.
"It's highly unethical," he said, "because it's clear that the letter
is not an outgrowth of the doctor's relationship with the patient."
According to what legal experts told the Times, sending drugs through
the mail could be criminal if the recipient does not have a
prescription.
Debbie Davis, a Lilly spokeswoman, told the Times that sending
unsolicited drugs through the mail was against company policy and
inappropriate.
'Appears to Go Beyond'
"While Lilly supports informing people about new treatment options
and encouraging them to discuss these options with their doctor, what
occurred in Florida appears to go beyond this," she said.
"It is inappropriate for Lilly sales personnel to support programs in
which medicine is mailed to patients without the patient's request," she
said in a statement.
"We understand why people should be concerned about receiving
unsolicited prescriptions in the mail. To the extent Lilly personnel may
have participated in this program, Lilly apologizes to those patients
affected by it."
Medical privacy advocates have been critical of mailings of targeted
marketing materials based on information in patients' pharmaceutical and
medical records. They say the mailing of drugs is an unwelcome
innovation.
"This is appalling in every possible way," Dr. Pearle told the Times.
"It's an escalation of a deplorable practice."
Joy Pritts, senior counsel at the Health Privacy Project in
Washington, added that "this is one step beyond what we normally see."
She told the Times the Prozac mailing was part of "the increasing trend
for the commercialization of health care information."
"It's being bought, sold and used like any other commodity," she
said, referring to patients' medical information. "This has nothing to
do with treating the patient. This has everything to do with generating
profits."
And even more to do with the Bush administration's new rules that
allow this sort of thing to happen without the patient giving permission
to his or her doctor to release private medical data to every Tom, Dick
and Harry.
Read more on this subject in related Hot Topics:
Health
Issues
Privacy
Back
|