An HIV-positive pilot
claims the government is liable for releasing his medical history during a
joint-agency investigation.
By Alicia Gallegos,
amednews staff.
Originally posted Dec. 26, 2011.
Originally posted Dec. 26, 2011.
The U.S. Supreme Court has
heard oral arguments in a case centering on whether the government is liable
for disclosing to another agency the medical history of an HIV-positive
patient.
The Social Security
Administration admits that it violated federal law when it shared a pilot's
medical records with the Federal Aviation Administration. But government
attorneys say the federal Privacy Act allows recovery for economic damages
only, not for emotional distress.
The case emphasizes the
importance of adhering to national privacy laws, such as the Health Insurance
Portability and Accountability Act, said Alexander Wohl, a law professor at the
Washington College of Law and a contributor to the Supreme Court's blog.
"It reinforces the
impact of those laws. Doctors have their own legal standards," but they
still need to be careful not to violate their patients' privacy, he said.
(cut)
Case at a glance
Is the government liable
for noneconomic damages for disclosing a person's medical records to another
agency?
A federal court said no.
The court ruled that the government violated the Privacy Act but is not
responsible for noneconomic damages. The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals
disagreed. It ruled that when a federal agency intentionally or willfully fails
to uphold its record-keeping obligations under the law, Congress intended that
the plaintiff be entitled to recover both pecuniary and nonpecuniary damages.
The case is before the U.S. Supreme Court, which heard arguments Nov. 30.
Impact: Attorneys for the
plaintiff say a ruling for the government would significantly limit recoveries
for people whose privacy is violated by government agencies. In addition,
whistle-blowers, including doctors, who report instances of fraud and abuse
would face greater disincentives to expose misconduct. A ruling for the
plaintiff would lead to more lawsuits against the government for overly broad
claims related to the Privacy Act, government attorneys say. A decision is
expected in 2012.
The entire story can be
read here.
