Private Practices
When it comes to medical records, violations of privacy can stem from several factors -- oversight failure, inadequate security measures, poor management, etc.-- so it's not surprising when debate arises over how to remedy a security breach.
In response to recent reports of privacy violations at UCLA Medical Center --apparently, some employees were a little too curious about the medical histories of Britney Spears and Farrah Fawcett -- a new bill is being proposed to deter future security problems. According to The Orange County Register, the bill will establish a new Office of Health Information Integrity to oversee privacy matters in California and, when necessary, issue some hefty fines.
Problem is, privacy laws already exist; they're just not being enforced. Ever have a Band-Aid that doesn't stick, so you put another one on top, only to have the second Band-Aid stick to the first and still fall off? Well, for opponents of the bill, that's just what the new law would do: add more regulations, but offer no real solutions. As the Register points out, the proposed office would consist of only one or two employees, not an entire privacy brigade; the sheer workload would be overwhelming.
So who should be responsible for preventing future violations? In this case, UCLA Medical Center is beefing up security through worker education, computer safeguards and audits, but what about medical centers that have yet to discover breaches within their own walls? Can hospitals, or even a government office, ever effectively anticipate problems and avoid infringements on privacy?