The Debates Are Set
A Commentary on “Lawmakers Consider Statewide Medical Database”
There is no doubt that accurate medical records are essential in providing quality health service for the physician and the patient alike. Patient analyses and treatments rely to it to a great extent. These facts are undisputed; however, the influx of arguments begin where data-sharing comes into view.
The main issue revolves on the issue of how much patient data can be disclosed. This further branches into sub issues on what entities will take charge of these pertinent data, how much will this cost, and which data should be included.
On one end are the advocates of privacy, pushing for patient confidentiality. They are promoting the view that healthcare providers should be mindful of security concerns and regulations regarding medical data records. Their allies in Congress have been consistently upholding their thrust to the point of vetoing bills which seek to propel sharing of medical data. Their main argument is that medical data-sharing infringes on a person’s right to privacy. Other issues that they sustain include the high cost involved in the centralization of these operations and the risk of record mismanagement on the end of the prospective service providers. These aside from existing statutes on some states are deemed to bar progress of EMRs in legislation.
On the other end are the proponents of interactive-sharing of data electronic records. They submit to the promise of greater patient safety, more efficiency and reduced healthcare costs for consumers. They opine that much medical progress can be achieved through this data-sharing, although to what extent of the data will be covered is still subject to discussion.
This is yet another subject that thrives on a rather gray area. In considering this matter for legislation, the guidelines used in observing the right to privacy of individuals may be useful to discern the extent the sort of data to be shared. It comes in easy terms: (1) it should be in accordance with existing laws; (2) must serve the interests of legitimate objectives; and (3) it must be of such nature that creates a necessity for the whole society. Expect a long and tiresome debate among legislators trying to outdo each other on the floor. But at the end of the day, it all settles to the fact that these may well have to be resolved through sound discretion and tactful medical professional handling.
There is no doubt that accurate medical records are essential in providing quality health service for the physician and the patient alike. Patient analyses and treatments rely to it to a great extent. These facts are undisputed; however, the influx of arguments begin where data-sharing comes into view.
The main issue revolves on the issue of how much patient data can be disclosed. This further branches into sub issues on what entities will take charge of these pertinent data, how much will this cost, and which data should be included.
On one end are the advocates of privacy, pushing for patient confidentiality. They are promoting the view that healthcare providers should be mindful of security concerns and regulations regarding medical data records. Their allies in Congress have been consistently upholding their thrust to the point of vetoing bills which seek to propel sharing of medical data. Their main argument is that medical data-sharing infringes on a person’s right to privacy. Other issues that they sustain include the high cost involved in the centralization of these operations and the risk of record mismanagement on the end of the prospective service providers. These aside from existing statutes on some states are deemed to bar progress of EMRs in legislation.
On the other end are the proponents of interactive-sharing of data electronic records. They submit to the promise of greater patient safety, more efficiency and reduced healthcare costs for consumers. They opine that much medical progress can be achieved through this data-sharing, although to what extent of the data will be covered is still subject to discussion.
This is yet another subject that thrives on a rather gray area. In considering this matter for legislation, the guidelines used in observing the right to privacy of individuals may be useful to discern the extent the sort of data to be shared. It comes in easy terms: (1) it should be in accordance with existing laws; (2) must serve the interests of legitimate objectives; and (3) it must be of such nature that creates a necessity for the whole society. Expect a long and tiresome debate among legislators trying to outdo each other on the floor. But at the end of the day, it all settles to the fact that these may well have to be resolved through sound discretion and tactful medical professional handling.
posted by Spammer Di Hacker | 1:59 PM
1 Comments:
Mag update ng blog, the public is clamoring for your biting opinion!
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home