Medical Privacy has
caused many obstacles for the lack of communication between patients
and doctors. Even after the health policies are enforced, there still
exist problems considering privacy. It is vital because trust is a
fundamental element in the process of doctor-patient relationship.
Medical records consist of many embarrassing information that
patients might not want it to be exposed. Without protection of
privacy, patients will avoid health care services and plans. They will
not bother to seek for help from doctors. These types of behaviors
are detrimental to both personal and public health.
The HIPAA known as
Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 is
supposed to help patients, yet it created more inconvenience. This
act should be implemented where it provides health services and plans
where they can serve a meaning of safety for the patients as well as
minors. There should be treatment, payment and health care operations
when it is necessary. Patients should also have authorization of
consent to whether or not they want to disclose their case from other
parties. The medical record being taken note at that particular
moment should have the consent of the patient to agree if share-able
or not.
For the minors, US
federal laws allow parents the right to access and control their
children’s health information in most instances. According to
HIPAA, this is a violation of minor medical privacy. (Anna 219) It
does not make sense because minors have less protection and privacy.
Therefore, there should be another implementation where there is a
limit of access and control. Parents should have a limited amount of
access for their children’s medical record until the children are
at the right age to deny their parents’ access.
Concerning identity
fraud, there could be an alternative where patients have Medical Data
ID. This type of ID can access their personal data like any credit
cards we use today. However, to prevent misconduct and protection of
ID users, fingerprint identification and address should be verified
before they can access their data. This can tighten the security and
safety from third parties.
According to
Willison of Medical Research Ethics, he examined and collected
databases where patients give their consent about medical tracking.
It is indicated that 38% of the eleven medical websites they visited
do not need consent. (Willison, 310) Only two suggested a
notification and opt-out process. However, outsiders that want the
data have to have association with requirement for consent. This
means that outsiders will not receive medical records unless they
have a relationship with the patient. It is clear that illegal
file-sharing of medical record is more secure now.
Work Cited
Annas
GJ. Medical privacy and medical research—judging the new federal
regulations. N Engl J Med 2002. Web. 24 March 2012. 346(3):216-220.
Willison
DJ, Emerson C, Szala-Meneok KV, et al. Access to medical records for
research purposes: varying perceptions across research ethics
boards. J Med Ethics 2008. Web. 24 March 2012. 34(4):308-314.
