> Thanks for your comments, but please remember I'm just a minion in
> this mess so I'm not in trouble, rather it is the south ends of the
> jackasses headed north who allow this to happen and the advisors,
> legal and otherwise, who tell them it is okay to do this.

Currently, today, the *interpretation* of HIPAA absolves you of
criminal liability.  However, the legal interpretation of HIPAA is
still being worked out in the courts; it is entirely possible that
some data privacy zealous district attorney could charge you under the
felony provisions of HIPAA as an accessory.  This email thread
constitutes acknowledgment after the fact of wrongdoing, by one
possible interpretation.  If I were in your position, I would consult
an attorney or at the very least do some research into your local
district attorney's leanings.

> My main point in bringing this to the table here is that FDE is 
> only a mechanism that is implemented by very fallible humans who 
> will bend under the pressure of losing their jobs and being 
> blacklisted from the industry.

Yes, this is absolutely true.

> It is slightly more complex than this. In theory a given doctor has
> access to only those records of their own patients and the patients
> that are seen by the same group. The reality is broader I think,
> but I don't think it allows them access to *every* medical record.

The "minimum necessary" language is not specific, and is open to
interpretation.  If this goes to a jury, I think your organization's
position will be in the unenviable position of establishing a legal
precedent here in "minimum necessary" in a way that is decidedly not
favorable.

> In general I agree. I don't think they are dumping the patient 
> records of an entire facility, but over time they acquire and keep
> much more than they are currently using or monitoring. This failure
> to purge unneeded records is the key problem beyond the arrogance
> of refusing to put up with password controls, time outs, and
> encryption requirements.

If you don't have a written records retention policy, your
organization's liability is far greater than if you do.  If you're not
informing the doctors that they are expected to purge this data, you
can't reasonably expect them to do so on their own.

> This is exactly what I think the lawyers are relying on. The 
> doctors are authorized, therefore their possession is legal. Once 
> it is in the hands of the doctor and lost, I believe their thinking
> is that it is the doctor's problem, not theirs. I would agree with
> your more inclusive version but, like you I'm not a lawyer so my
> opinion doesn't count for much.

This is tricky, because it relies upon a legal position that once the
data is transferred to the doctor, it is no longer "owned" by the
organization, but by the doctor.

And, for what it's worth, this is a discarded argument.  See the
Department of Health and Human Services own guidelines for remote
access and storage of data:

http://www.cms.hhs.gov/SecurityStandard/Downloads/SecurityGuidanceforRemoteUseFinal122806.pdf

*Clearly* the Department of Health and Human Services regards this
data as still being the responsibility of the organization, not the
doctor.

> Any ideas to help with this, direct or indirect, are most welcome.

Quite frankly, I think you have both a professional and moral
obligation to disclose this security breach.  If you are reluctant to
do so because of job security issues, you need to confront a
supervisor with the afore linked HSS guidelines document.  If they
refuse to go forward, you should disclose this breach to whatever
health oversight agency or public health authority that has
jurisdiction over your organization.  You have whistleblower
protections (see 164.502 of HIPAA).  Of course, this won't prevent
your organization from firing you if they choose to do so, but will
certainly give you justifiable meaningful grounds for an unlawful
termination lawsuit.  This will be a long, drawn out, ugly affair, but
if you just sit and do nothing, your organization's bad security
practices will continue unabated, and sooner or later you're going to
be in this position again.
_______________________________________________
FDE mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.xml-dev.com/mailman/listinfo/fde

Reply via email to