HEALTH DEPARTMENT CHANGES TO PROPOSED DATA COLLECTION RULE DO NOT
ADDRESS CITIZEN CONCERNS FOR PRIVACY
(St. Paul, Minnesota) - Attempting to address widespread public opposition to
state collection of private medical data, the Minnesota Department of Health has
published proposed changes to their proposed data collection rule. But according
to Citizens' Council on Health Care (CCHC), the concerns of the over 600
citizens, who have written letters of opposition, have not been addressed.
"There is still no patient consent for disclosure of the data. That's what
citizens are demanding. State health officials will still know who you are, what
diagnosis you have, what doctor is treating you, what treatment you receive,"
says Twila Brase, president of CCHC.
Although health officials placed some limits on the department's authority
and added a measure of accountability, Brase lists seven concerns with the
proposed changes to the proposed rule:
* The Commissioner retains authority to add new data elements not listed in
the rule, which could include genetic and lifestyle data.
* Requiring review by the data use committee ignores the fact that the data
use committee has no authority in the matter. It can only make recommendations.
The Commissioner retains sole authority to allow or deny access to data.
* Despite the public's outrage, there is still only one consumer on the data
use committee, and that consumer is appointed by the Commissioner.
* In what appears to be a political move, health officials added "policy
development information for the Minnesota state legislature" as an internal use
of patient data.
* Adding the use of "appropriate risk adjustment methodologies" to report
variations in cost, quality and outcomes if a provider or group purchaser is
identified assumes that there is only one possible calculation methodology. Such
reporting may lead to incorrect interpretations, and costly litigation.
* Although the department added annual reports on use of patient data, there
is no broad distribution of the annual data use reports, and only summary
information is included.
* There is no annual reporting of the taxpayer costs associated with
maintaining the system, collecting the data, training staff, conducting
research, conducting audits, updating security, and litigation and legal
services.
"Where there is no privacy for citizens, there should certainly be no privacy
for health officials. If the judge allows the rule to move forward, the least
the public should expect is full disclosure by the health department. A detailed
accounting of activities and costs associated with the data system and use of
patient data should be readily available to every citizen," says Brase.
Brase says that every citizen should receive a Miranda-type warning if the
judge fails to rule for citizens. Known in Minnesota as the Tennessen warning,
it requires those who gather data for the government to inform citizens of the
collection and the specific purposes of the collection. The proposed rule does
not have this requirement.
"If this data collection is for the good of the public as the department
asserts, than the department should have no qualms with letting the public
regularly know about it," adds Brase.
ALL INFORMATION, DATA, AND
MATERIAL CONTAINED, PRESENTED, OR PROVIDED HERE IS FOR GENERAL INFORMATION
PURPOSES ONLY AND IS NOT TO BE CONSTRUED AS REFLECTING THE KNOWLEDGE OR OPINIONS
OF THE PUBLISHER, AND IS NOT TO BE CONSTRUED OR INTENDED AS PROVIDING MEDICAL OR
LEGAL ADVICE. THE DECISION WHETHER OR NOT TO VACCINATE IS AN IMPORTANT AND
COMPLEX ISSUE AND SHOULD BE MADE BY YOU, AND YOU ALONE, IN CONSULTATION WITH
YOUR HEALTH CARE PROVIDER.
"A foolish faith in authority is the worst enemy of truth."
-- Albert Einstein, letter to a friend, 1901
"I know of no safe depository of the ultimate powers of the society but the people themselves, and if we think them not enlightened enough to exercise control with a wholesome discretion, the remedy is not to take it from them, but to inform their discretion by education."
-- Thomas Jefferson, letter to William C. Jarvis, September 28, 1820
"What's the point of vaccination if it doesn't protect you from the unvaccinated?"
-- Sandy Gottstein
"Who gets to decide what the greater good is and how many will be sacrificed to it?"