It Worked Real Good With Guns. So...

reply to post by Klassified


You are probably right on the ulterior motive. I can see as others have mentioned the need for the cops sitting there, but not a need for this kind of record keeping.

And you are right that it doesn't stop all of the crime associated with them, it does help keep some of the drugs away from people though. We are on such a slippery slope any more. There is no longer the ability to trust people who we used to look to for help.

reply to post by Klassified



From the perspective of HIPPA....is this legal?

reply to post by bigfatfurrytexan

I guess that depends on whether or not hippa considers this a violation of confidentiality. Hypothetically, if someone gives their personal information voluntarily, even if they don't know it isn't a legal requirement...
would it fall under DEA prescription data mining?

Klassified
reply to post by bigfatfurrytexan

 

I guess that depends on whether or not hippa considers this a violation of confidentiality. Hypothetically, if someone gives their personal information voluntarily, even if they don't know it isn't a legal requirement...
would it fall under DEA prescription data mining?

The thing is, I believe there are records control requirements.

reply to post by bigfatfurrytexan

I've been doing a little reading on hippa's site. So far I haven't found a lot regarding this, but there's definitely some interesting info there (Insurance companies have way too much power).

Still looking.

DEA Take Back Program

So far, it seems it is supposed to be a "no questions asked" program. The radio station, or the hospital, could have made a mistake when they said names would be connected to what was turned in. I'll see if I can find out tomorrow. Now I want to know if they're data mining. Which according to hippa, is a no no. If I'm reading it right.

reply to post by Klassified


As an employer, the controls I have to put in place for storing things like Dr notes, insurance enrollment forms, and FMLA paperwork are somewhat stringent. I mean, if you follow standardized processes you shouldn't run afoul...but I am unsure that a DEA agent should have access to any of my medical records (which is what a prescription bottle really is).

reply to post by bigfatfurrytexan

That's my own thinking as well. Maybe I can find out something tomorrow.

I'll post it in here.

bigfatfurrytexan
reply to post by Klassified

 

As an employer, the controls I have to put in place for storing things like Dr notes, insurance enrollment forms, and FMLA paperwork are somewhat stringent. I mean, if you follow standardized processes you shouldn't run afoul...but I am unsure that a DEA agent should have access to any of my medical records (which is what a prescription bottle really is).

That was exactly my concern and point as well. If you voluntarily provide the information, are they still bound by the HIPAA laws to follow all those protocols? If not, then they are preying upon the ignorant population for their own gains. Do you know how much $$ that data is worth to the insurance companies (without HIPAA strings)?

It's worth more than a meteorite metal ring, with gold plated inlay, encrusted with diamonds, and personally blessed by the pope.

reply to post by Krakatoa


With or without your consent, there are still patients rights issues at play.

I am not keen enough on the law...only keen enough to wonder if there is a violation here.

My understanding is that medical information is medical information. They should have a responsibility to inform themselves, and should be liable for failures in this regard. Especially if the hospital is aware of it and sponsoring in any way.