Although I understand some of the rationales behind this move (the duplication issue, in particular), this new policy adopted by Mass. (at the request of the Fed) does give me some pause. It seems like once a week there is some leak of information that was supposed to be confidential, veterans, teachers, hospital records...all have had their information compromised in recent months. The stakes seem higher in this case. I hope the Fed, in requiring this, is also providing much needed security and training on how to handle this highly personal and sensitive information.
_____________________________________________
from 365gay.com
Massachusetts has become the latest state to agree to federal demands that doctors provide the names of patients diagnosed with HIV/AIDS.
The Centers for Disease Control last year began implementing the Program Evaluation and Monitoring System (PEMS). It requires unprecedented surveillance requirements for federally funded HIV prevention programs. Among the regulations is a provision requiring health care providers that get federal funding to provide the CDC with details about every patient, including their sex life and partners.
The Massachusetts Department of Public Health this week agreed to begin collecting the information after the CDC threatened to withhold about $15 million in annual funding. Previously people were given a code when tested for HIV to ensure patient confidentiality.
The CDC says that system, employed by more than a dozen states, has resulted in skewed numbers of patients and duplications of patients. Many of the states have already agreed to identify patients by their names. The CDC requirement has divided AIDS activists and doctors throughout the country. Massachusetts is no exception.
"In Massachusetts, I have little concern about the change in policy," Dr. Steve Boswell, president of Fenway Community Health, told the Boston Globe. But Denise McWilliams, director of public policy and legal affairs AIDS Action Committee of Massachusetts, disagrees. "Clearly anytime you collect personal information about somebody, you risk having that information get out into the public domain," she told the Globe.
recommend this
email
print
link to this page
Comments: 2
A toughtful, informative and thought-provoking article.
Yet another example of "big brother" watching over us about some things and telling us were too stupid to know about other things: like exactly where our tax dollars are going, and for what.
I've passed your articles along.