Sure, if you’re planning on using those links for justification. I was able to see all three, but I didn’t find anything that contradicted trublmakr–in fact, the last one pretty much supported them, since it said that medical records should never be erased or destroyed, even when they are in error, but that a new record should be made with the corrections.
The patient is allowed to have copies of the records (most times), but the doctor is obligated by law to retain or arrange for the retention of the records, for a long time.
Wow, it’s true. Your cites totally support everything trublmaker and I said. Thanks for providing them. And they also point out just how fettered your access is. Health care providers have 30 days to respond to the request (which is what i said). And it is definitely only WITH the provider’s say-so - i.e. they’ll be reviewing the record first.
I’d appreciate your not just making things up. This is what I actually said:
Not only do I stand by every word I said, I’d like to reemphasize it. The only people who will be making changes to your chart is the provider who owns them. You can of course *request * any change you like but the provider is only going to change it if they agree. The only obligation that they have in the end is to note your disagreement.
Wow there is a lot of info about this out there. Thanks everyone. Igues my next question would be what are the odds a doctor would have my records from (just got depressed doing the math in my head. I am getting old ) 12 years ago or would that be too much to ask. I am posting it in this because it is related to my original question. But if it needs a new thread let me know.
Depends on the doc. I once went to see a physician 24 years after I had last seen him. Much to my surprise, my file was still there. This doctor kept everything forever.
You and trblmkr have to work on the reading comprehension. Shall we review?
The OP asks if he can get the information in his medical records so he can give it to his new health care provider.
The simple answer to this is “yes”, and the first three replies essentially say this, including my
But trblmakr decides to muddy the waters.
I ask for a cite for this remarkably broad assertion.
His “cite” is that he “works in a doctor’s office”.
vivalostwages replies
trbl responds to this, apparently in contradiction:
I reply:
(I should have cited the HIPAA privacy rules here, but the google links were quicker and easier.)
trblmakr continues to argue, stating:
and
He’s wrong in his implied claims that (a)HIPAA somehow doesn’t apply to non-electronically transmitted medical records; and (b) somehow physicians have broad powers to say yea or nay to patient requests for copies of their records. (I’ll get back to this point later, with appropriate cites.)
But lets return to the thread. Ms.Robyn posts some generally accurate information and links, and she gets piled on by trbl and his partisans. uglybeech massively misconstrues HIPAA:
Sigh. No. The provider does not have any meaningful “say-so” over whether to provide the information in the records to the patient.
In essence, the HIPAA privacy regulations establish that the patient has broad control over what his medical information is used for. The health care provider generally cannot give the patient’s information to anyone, without the patient’s specific authorization. And the health care provider must give the information to the patient if the patient demands it. In other words, the patient controls the use of his information. That’s HIPAA privacy in a nutshell.
Yes, as some people keep repeating (as if it’s important somehow) the physical paper that the record is written on belongs to the provider. I acknowleged as much in my first and third replies here.
And yes, there are exceptions in the regs. There are certain, very limited disclosures/uses of the medical record information that the provider can do without authorization. (In the interests of time, I’m not going to discuss all of these here, but I’ll link to the regs below.) Also, there are very, very limited exceptions to the mandatory disclosure to the patient rule. The discretion given to the physician is quite limited. Here’s the text of the main exception:
For disclosure to be avoided to the patient, the physican must be able to establish (there’s a review process) that the disclosure is likely to cause bodily harm, or (only if the records refer to a person other than the patient) substantial harm. (Subsection (iii) only applies to requests, not by the patient, but by someone acting on his behalf.) This is a damn narrow exception.
So we’re back to the main point. The answer to the OP in just about every normal scenario is yes, you have the right to get your medical information. You, not the provider, control who gets to access your information.
For those who want to read the full text of the reg for themselves, a link follows. For those who don’t have the time or inclination, and are trying to decide on who’s interpretation here is likely to be correct, I suggest that a lawyer’s analysis of a complex law might be more reliable than that of a couple medical office clerks.
Second and lastly, my main point was that the OP should not walk into the office and expect to have his/her records handed to him right then and there. It doesn’t work that way, and I was hoping to spare them a wasted trip.
I never implied that HIPPA laws only applied to electronically transmitted records.
Uh-huh. And Odaran, if you run into any wilfully ignorant medical clerks (sadly, they appear to be fairly common) who refuse to give you a copy of your medical records, here’s how to file a complaint with the appropriate Federal agency:
) 12 years ago or would that be too much to ask. I am posting it in this because it is related to my original question. But if it needs a new thread let me know.