President Big Brother's Doublethink
FRC Washington Update, July 22, 2010 - People you've
never met are about to know intimate details about
you, thanks to last year's stimulus law. Under Section
3001, President Obama put the wheels in motion for
massive online health care records registry. By 2014,
every American will be forced to put a detailed health
profile online so that bureaucrats in Washington can
better micromanage your care. Once the medical records
are put into this massive Internet database, Big Brother
can monitor--not just whether your care is medically
effective but also "cost-effective."
That's where Dr. Donald "One-Man Death Panel" Berwick
comes in. It will be up to his office, the Centers
for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS), to decide
whether your care should be rationed. At the very least,
everyone will be ordered to disclose "diagnostic
test results, problem lists, medication lists, allergy
lists, and procedures" so that bureaucratic strangers
can access this very personal information.
FRC was already wary about the idea of a federal
health care registry, but new details about what will
and won't be included have made us question the usefulness
of the system. On Tuesday, reporters
from CNSNews caught up with the President's National
Coordinator for Health Information Technology,
Dr. David Blumenthal, and asked him some pointed questions
about the rules of his electronic health records (EHR).
CNSNews: "So when it says a 'test result,'
if they did an HIV test, they wouldn't have to put
it in the record?"
Blumenthal: "[That's] between the doctor
and the patient."
CNSNews: "So what does have to go in
there?"
Blumenthal: "The information that the
patient and the physician agree needs to be in the
record."
CNSNews: "So you can say, 'I don't want
this in my health record, I don't want that in my health
record?'"
Blumenthal: "Exactly the same thing
in the paper world would pertain in the electronic
world."
In other words, patients can choose to withhold
information from their records. Obviously, protecting
individual privacy is important (in fact, it's why
we oppose the idea in the first place.) But if the
administration has demanded an online registry to "maintain
an up-to-date problem list [in America]," why
would it tell people to omit their HIV status? Unlike
other illnesses, this virus is a direct threat to public
health. If the government is going to catalog anything,
HIV/AIDS should be at the top of the list.
Instead, it appears that Blumenthal is promoting
a politically correct a la carte record system, where
Americans can pick and choose what they want to exclude.
Which begs the question (sic): why bother with the
registry at all? Why not let people opt out entirely?
# # #
If this mandate doesn't exasperate you, Ken Blackwell
and Ken Klukowski's new op-ed on the health care law
might. Check out their Wall Street Journal column, "Why
the ObamaCare Tax Penalty Is Unconstitutional."
By Tony Perkins, President, Family Research Council
FOR MORE INFORMATION:
Web site: www.frc.org
FRC Washington Update, July 22, 2010 - People you've never met are about to know intimate details about you, thanks to last year's stimulus law. Under Section 3001, President Obama put the wheels in motion for massive online health care records registry. By 2014, every American will be forced to put a detailed health profile online so that bureaucrats in Washington can better micromanage your care. Once the medical records are put into this massive Internet database, Big Brother can monitor--not just whether your care is medically effective but also "cost-effective."
That's where Dr. Donald "One-Man Death Panel" Berwick comes in. It will be up to his office, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS), to decide whether your care should be rationed. At the very least, everyone will be ordered to disclose "diagnostic test results, problem lists, medication lists, allergy lists, and procedures" so that bureaucratic strangers can access this very personal information.
FRC was already wary about the idea of a federal health care registry, but new details about what will and won't be included have made us question the usefulness of the system. On Tuesday, reporters from CNSNews caught up with the President's National Coordinator for Health Information Technology, Dr. David Blumenthal, and asked him some pointed questions about the rules of his electronic health records (EHR).
CNSNews: "So when it says a 'test result,' if they did an HIV test, they wouldn't have to put it in the record?"
Blumenthal: "[That's] between the doctor and the patient."
CNSNews: "So what does have to go in there?"
Blumenthal: "The information that the patient and the physician agree needs to be in the record."
CNSNews: "So you can say, 'I don't want this in my health record, I don't want that in my health record?'"
Blumenthal: "Exactly the same thing in the paper world would pertain in the electronic world."
In other words, patients can choose to withhold information from their records. Obviously, protecting individual privacy is important (in fact, it's why we oppose the idea in the first place.) But if the administration has demanded an online registry to "maintain an up-to-date problem list [in America]," why would it tell people to omit their HIV status? Unlike other illnesses, this virus is a direct threat to public health. If the government is going to catalog anything, HIV/AIDS should be at the top of the list.
Instead, it appears that Blumenthal is promoting a politically correct a la carte record system, where Americans can pick and choose what they want to exclude. Which begs the question (sic): why bother with the registry at all? Why not let people opt out entirely?
# # #
If this mandate doesn't exasperate you, Ken Blackwell
and Ken Klukowski's new op-ed on the health care law
might. Check out their Wall Street Journal column, "Why
the ObamaCare Tax Penalty Is Unconstitutional."
By Tony Perkins, President, Family Research Council
FOR MORE INFORMATION:
Web site: www.frc.org