Author: platack
Posted: Sun Mar 31, 2013 11:49 pm
| Tndb wrote: |
| HIPPA protects that info. They will not know about meds or doc visits unless you tell them. I had the same fear and looked into it |
You’re likely correct. But HIPAA is something VERY few people actually understand and, since it’s a bell you can’t unrung and the consequences are so dramatic, HIPAA is something, each person understanding EXACTLY where he stands before making blanket presumptions is HUGELY important.
Most people presume HIPAA means healthcare providers can’t disclose any personally identifiable healthcare information except under subpoena or other certain exigent legal circumstances and their personal healthcare information is therefore may as well be stored in the Cone of Silence.
BALDERDASH.
HIPAA merely requires "covered entities" to obtain your consent before disclosing any of your healthcare information, which most do on a regular basis every day. Most people sign away the majority of their privacy assurances as a condition of participating in insurance coverage, obtaining medical treatment or filling a prescription. Once you’ve signed, they’re free to disclose under the terms of the waiver at their discretion.
You’re free to revoke it, and they’re free to no longer provide healthcare-related services to you.
If HIPAA was all about assurances guaranteeing your privacy as a patient, why the hell are patients the ones signing all the HIPAA forms (which most patients never bother to read)? They may claim to require a signature to acknowledge they’ve informed you of your rights, but within that disclosure is almost invariably some kind of waiver that undoes MOST of the privacy most people presume they have which, in all fairness, is often necessary for many providers to engage in the business of providing healthcare.
Think about it. If what most people assume were true, it’d be healthcare providers who’d be doing all the signing of all the statements to establish that they understand HIPAA and are promising to keep your health information private.
Even as people seek reimbursement through Flexible Spending account administrators to be reimbursed with their own money, here’s a little sample of one waiver one of the largest firms requires with each claim people submit:
| Quote: |
| I hereby authorize XXXXX or its representatives to obtain necessary information from all physicians, hospitals, medical service providers, pharmacists, employers, and all other agencies or organizations (this includes other insurers) to consider the claim for reimbursement under my Healthcare Account. |
Now, whether or not they actually consult your employer, they’re at perfect liberty to disclose as they see fit. Historically, many businesses would have ethical barriers to the types of information they’d seek, but all bets are off today when cost control is king.
Another misperception is that Obamacare fixes all. In addition to everything it starts out by breaking, all it does is require some kind of health insurance be available. It doesn’t do a damned thing to ensure continued employment is available and, despite many people’s presumption that everybody will now have all the jobs and health insurance they ever wanted, they’re more likely to find employers finding even more blatant and creative ways to become even more aggressive in the types of employment risk they’re willing to take on.
It may very well be most people can obtain insurance reimbursement for their Sub treatment without negatively impacting their employment status. But one person making any sort of presumption of his own situation based upon anybody else’s would be the biggest mistake of all.
Best of luck.