The measure currently includes plans for:
* An electronic health record "for each person in the United States by 2014."
* A national coordinator to develop a "nationwide health information technology
infrastructure that allows for the electronic use and exchange of information."
The medical privacy rule established under the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (Signed into law 1996 by the Clinton administration) already allows personal health information to be passed along without patient consent for treatment, payment and "oversight." The recipients of such information could be any of the people in the 600,000 organizations in the industry.
President Obama has pledged to advance freedom, therefore the freedom to choose not to participate in a national electronic health-records system must be upheld.
Do your realized information such as documentation on abortions, mental health problems, impotence, being labeled as a non-compliant patient, lawsuits against doctors and sexual problems could be shared electronically with, perhaps, millions of people.
Researchers already are looking for genes related to violence, crime and different behaviors. Classifying of people could lead to discrimination and prejudice. … People can look at data about you and make assessments ultimately of who you are. Efforts to study traits and gene factors and classify people would be just the beginning. The government, with information about potential health weaknesses, could say to couples, "We don't want your expensive children."
In England they decided they should have doctors looking for problem children, and have those children reported, and their DNA taken in case they would become criminals. Published reports in Britain note that senior police forensics experts believe genetic samples should be studied, because it may be possible to identify potential criminals AS YOUNG AS AGE 5.
I think people have forgotten about eugenics. The fact of the matter is that the eugenicists have not gone away. Newborn genetic testing is the entry into the 21st Century version of eugenics
Americans MIGHT benefit from an integrated system capable of making our medical records available wherever we may need them, but only if the system is properly used.
Nobody including and especially the government should be allowed to create such extensive profiles.
The medical technology portion of the economic stimulus bill does not sufficiently protect patient privacy, and recent amendments have made this situation worse. Medical privacy must be strengthened before the measure's final passage.
(compiled from http://wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=87322)
What about people who want to "live off the grid" we're not all criminals, we are law abiding citizens who just want our privacy. We should have that option. We are adults and know that when we opt out, should we travel far from home and need medical attention and having opted out inadvertently caused our own death or the death of our child, then the responsibility on us and Doctors and hospitals can't be sued, and parents can't be prosecuted for trying to have a private life for themselves and their children, but neither should any doctor or hospital be able to withhold care if the person isn't in the system. People sign consent forms now because the doctors and hospitals give the impression that without signing they won't treat you. Also, if someone gives consent then changes their mind they should be able to then opt out and have their info erased from the system.
"The medical privacy rule established under the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (Signed into law 1996 by the Clinton administration)."
So Obama is just taking the Clinton era to the next level. Continuing what the Clintons started. Why am I not surprised? Oh, yeah, because I didn't fall for the "change" rhetoric, I knew is was BS because I did my research... because I'm not a sheeple.
______________________________________________________________
UPDATE:
Vote Number: House Vote #46 in 2009
Date: Jan 28, 2009 6:11PM
Result: Passed
Bill: H.R. 1: American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009
Totals Democrats Republicans Independents
Yea: 244 (56%) 244 0 0
Nay: 188(43%) 11 177 0
Present: 0(0%) 0 0 0
Not Voting: 1(0%) 0 1 0
Required: Simple Majority of 432 votes (=217 votes)
See how your representative voted here
Please note: Patriots /TRAITORS
____________________________________________________
From Associated Press (Update: 1/31/09)
Analysis: Stimulus bill that's not all stimulating
By ANDREW TAYLOR – 12 hours ago
They call it "stimulus" legislation, but the economic measures racing through Congress would devote tens of billions of dollars to causes that have little to do with jolting the country out of recession.
$345 million for Agriculture Department computers
$650 million for TV converter boxes
$15 billion for college scholarships
Yes, there are many billions of dollars in "ready-to-go" job-creating projects in President Barack Obama's economic stimulus bill. But there are also plenty of items that are just unfinished business for Congress' old bulls.
An $800 billion-plus package, it turns out, gives lawmakers plenty of opportunities to rid themselves of nagging headaches left over from the days when running up the government's $10 trillion-plus debt was a bigger concern.
$1 billion to deal with Census problems
$88 million to help move the Public Health Service into a new building next year. $2.1 billion to pay off a looming shortfall in public housing accounts
$870 million to combat the flu
$400 million to slow the spread of HIV and other sexually transmitted diseases such as chlamydia.
"I have communicated to the administration that there are parts of this package that don't meet the test that they themselves established of temporary, timely and targeted," said Senate Budget Committee Chairman Kent Conrad, D-N.D. He wants Obama to weigh in to knock out the clunkers during House-Senate negotiations.
But nothing is in the legislation by accident. By including in the Senate stimulus bill such far-ranging ideas lawmakers are able to thin out their in-boxes, even if they aren't doing much to create jobs.
$40 million to convert the way health statistics are collected — from paper to an electronic system
$380 million for a rainy day fund for the Women, Infants and Children program that delivers healthful food to the poor. (WIC got the equivalent of a $1 billion infusion last fall.)
At the same time, putting items in the stimulus bill that really should be handled in annual appropriations bills creates more room in the latter for pet projects and other programs.
It creates "headroom," a top Senate GOP budget aide said, for things senators didn't have room for in the regular process but still want to do.
Some lawmakers are sounding warnings.
"I suggested ... less spending and especially less spending for those items that are not stimulus and should be funded through the regular appropriations process," said Rep. Jerry Lewis of California, top Republican on the Appropriations Committee.
Part of the reason so much non-stimulus spending has made it into the stimulus bill is that there are only so many traditional jobs-heavy public works projects that can get started quickly. As it is, most of the money in the bill for road building, water projects and mass transit probably won't be spent until the economy has turned around and is back on a recovery path.
For example, just one-third of $30 billion proposed by the House for highway construction would reach the economy in the next year and a half, according to the Congressional Budget Office.
Democrats are going ahead with Obama's $500 tax credit for most workers and $1,000 for couples even though there's wide agreement that last year's rebate checks weren't effective in sparking recovery.
Defenders of the package said that once experts determined it would take $800 billion to start to pull the country out of recession and emphasized the urgency, details took on less importance.
But some Democrats, like Sen. Ben Nelson of Nebraska, think the $3.5 billion in the stimulus package devoted to health research, or the $14 billion-$15 billion for boosting Pell Grant college scholarships by $400 to $500 would be better spent on additional brick and mortar infrastructure projects.
"You don't want to be against Pell Grants," Nelson said. "But the question is, how many people go to work on Pell Grants? Should it be in this legislation?"
EDITOR'S NOTE _ Andrew Taylor covers Congress and the federal budget for The Associated Press.
Update: 02/13/2009
Read the new stimulus bill as agreed on by the House and Senate
Here are some excerpts from it:
INDIVIDUALLY IDENTIFIABLE HEALTH INFORMATION- The term ‘individually identifiable health information’ has the meaning given such term in section 1171(6) of the Social Security Act.
(3) ACCEPTANCE OF DETAILEES- Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the Office may accept detailed personnel from other Federal agencies without regard to whether the agency described under paragraph (1) is reimbursed.
AREAS REQUIRED FOR CONSIDERATION- For purposes of subparagraph (A), the HIT Policy Committee shall make recommendations for at least the following areas:
‘(i) Technologies that protect the privacy of health information and promote security in a qualified electronic health record, including for the segmentation and protection from disclosure of specific and sensitive individually identifiable health information with the goal of minimizing the reluctance of patients to seek care (or disclose information about a condition) because of privacy concerns, in accordance with applicable law, and for the use and disclosure of limited data sets of such information.
OTHER AREAS FOR CONSIDERATION- In making recommendations under subparagraph (A), the HIT Policy Committee may consider the following additional areas:
(ix) Methods, guidelines, and safeguards to facilitate secure access to patient information by a family member, caregiver, or guardian acting on behalf of a patient due to age-related and other disability, cognitive impairment, or dementia that prevents a patient from accessing the patient’s individually identifiable health information.
SEC. 13111. COORDINATION OF FEDERAL ACTIVITIES WITH ADOPTED STANDARDS AND IMPLEMENTATION SPECIFICATIONS.
(a) Spending on Health Information Technology Systems- As each agency (as defined in the Executive Order issued on August 22, 2006, relating to promoting quality and efficient health care in Federal government administered or sponsored health care programs) implements, acquires, or upgrades health information technology systems used for the direct exchange of individually identifiable health information between agencies and with non-Federal entities, it shall utilize, where available, health information technology systems and products that meet standards and implementation specifications adopted under section 3004(b) of the Public Health Service Act, as added by section 13101.
Promotion of technologies and best practices that enhance the protection of health information by all holders of individually identifiable health information.
PERSONAL HEALTH RECORD- The term ‘personal health record’ means an electronic record of individually identifiable health information on an individual that can be drawn from multiple sources and that is managed, shared, and controlled by or for the individual.
PHR IDENTIFIABLE HEALTH INFORMATION- The term ‘PHR identifiable health information’ means individually identifiable health information, as defined in section 1171(6) of the Social Security Act (
(A) that is provided by or on behalf of the individual; and
(B) that identifies the individual or with respect to which there is a reasonable basis to believe that the information can be used to identify the individual.
VENDOR OF PERSONAL HEALTH RECORDS- The term ‘vendor of personal health records’ means an entity, other than a covered entity (as defined in paragraph (3)), that offers or maintains a personal health record.
AP Article here
No comments:
Post a Comment