3 ms·
this is a misleading title in particular because it applies to the maryland exchange's website and not, as a whole, to 'obamacare.' regardless, how is this any
by nsfmc 13y ago
this is a misleading title in particular because it applies to the maryland exchange's website and not, as a whole, to 'obamacare.'
regardless, how is this any different than any other website handing over information when a lawful request has been made? is there some expectation that exchanges are immune from these sorts of requests from law enforcement agencies?
similarly, is there any question that correspondence with a public agency can potentially be entered into a public record? this doesn't actually overturn doctor patient confidentiality (which would be worthy of a scary headline), it's just enumerating the same problems you likely already need to contend with when dealing with private insurance.
- ScottWhigham 13y agosimilarly, is there any question that correspondence with a public agency can potentially be entered into a public record? As many HIPPA-related documents as I've had to sign as a consultant working in/around medical and as a patient, I'd have assumed HIPPA was in force here as well since we're talking (a) medical info that is (b) personally identifiable.
- nsfmc 13y agoagreed, it would be particularly disturbing if a govt service were flaunting its blatant disregard for hippa (which, again, would be headline-worthy for that reason alone)