Stay Informed

Sign up for news & alerts

Already signed up?
Login here
What Can I Do?


Get Help
Need alcohol or drug help for yourself or someone else? GET HELP
Continuing Education
Free online courses for addiction counselors LEARN ONLINE
Resources
Resources
Find useful publications, online documents & more.


DrugScreening.org


 
Pa. Officials Say Less Confidentiality Could Yield More Addiction Treatment
February 25, 2008

Share Share Email
Email
Print
Print
SubscribeSubscribe
News Summary

Confidentiality laws that limit the ability of insurers and other payers to get information about individuals in addiction treatment sometimes prevent a barrier to getting care, according to some Pennsylvania policymakers.

The Associated Press reported Feb. 23 that the state Health Department is proposing to ease confidentiality rules in hopes of lowering obstacles to care.

"We have a system where one (service) provider is not allowed to talk to another," state Health Secretary Calvin Johnson said. "The system is not working in the best interest of the client."

Currently, the state Health Department allows treatment programs to provide insurers with information on whether patients are being treated, their prognosis and progress, the nature of care being delivered, and information on relapses. The department is proposing that insurers also be allowed to find out a patient's treatment history, specific medical conditions, and their history of alcohol and other drug abuse.

Some critics say the plan gives insurers too much access to personal information. "We're required by licensure to interview patients very intensely," said Deborah Beck, president of the Drug and Alcohol Service Providers Organization of Pennsylvania. "We know all about you, about your psychological history, your sexual history, none of which have anything to do with what your (treatment) payer would need to know."

"[Insurers] don't need to know whether you've been in and out of child welfare," said Public Welfare Secretary Estelle Richman, who thinks that the state's confidentiality requirements may be excessive. "They do need to know whether you've been struggling with addiction issues."

Michelle Denk, executive director of the Pennsylvania Association of County Drug and Alcohol Administrators, disputed the notion that lack of information sharing with insurers has prevented patients from getting care. And the Independent Regulatory Review Commission, which is considering the proposed changes to the law, stated on Feb. 13 that, "We agree ... that an unintended consequence of the proposal could be fewer people seeking and receiving treatment for their drug and alcohol addiction problems for fear that personal and potentially embarrassing information could be released to others."

COMMENTS ON THIS ARTICLE:

Posted by 12 steps program friend on 03 Mar 08 11:19 PM EST
Bad, very bad idea, will result in many not pursuing insurance paid intervention help. Of course this is a win-win situation for the insurance companies and lose-lose for the client. What a devious and counterproductive position for much needed health care providers.

Posted by egs on 03 Mar 08 06:18 PM EST
The aforementioned confidentiality issues are not unique to those individuals who experience substance abuse [or those who insure/treat/incarcerate, etc...]and reside in PA. Somehow every other state in the US seem to function quite well using 42 CFR Federal Confidentiality Laws and Statutes. Why do PA providers continue to dilute themselves into thinking that confidentiality issues, situations and conflicts we deal with is so different than everyone else...or any other state? If PA is so right about the virtues of these "extra protections", how come not one other state has followed suit?

Posted by Chuck Sigler, D.Phil., CAC on 03 Mar 08 09:13 AM EST
I think we need to be careful with how we alter existing confidentiality laws in Pennsylvania. It's one thing to release information to other Health Care Providers; it's another to release information to additional "service" providers. Will probation officers of mandated clients be service providers? I've had past experience with a probation officer wanting to know what drug a urinalysis tested positive for so he could violate a person's probation if it happened to be a certain drug. What about Children and Family Services agencies seeking to terminate parental rights? I've experienced caseworkers attempting to acquire damaging information on clients attempting to retain their parental rights in the early stages of treatment and recovery. I also have concerns with insurance companies obtaining information above and beyond merely what is required their monitoring drug and alcohol services.

Posted by kbowman on 27 Feb 08 06:34 PM EST
The regulations in question have no bearing on/do not apply to provider to provider communication; this can happen now (as long as with federally compliant client consent)and would not change under the proposed regulations. A major concern is that the proposed changes would greatly expand what insurers could recieve. A concern both in terms of client and family privacy and stigma but also because it would conflict with and potentially damage an existing state addiction insurance law that provides significant protection to individuals in need of treatment.

Posted by William Stauffer, LSW, CAC on 26 Feb 08 05:17 PM EST
This proposal would reduce access to treatment by keeping people from seeking help. How many people out there in recovery would want the intimate details of their drug use and other highly sensitive information shared with managed care organizations? What happens to the information then? Who monitors the MCO's to insure they handle the information correctly? Don't we all talk about the tremendous stigma that people seeking help face? Do we want to add additional barriers? It is also a very subjective standard and would be very expensive for providers to negotiate. There has been much opposition to these proposals from all across the state. We can only hope that high level policy makers start actually listening to the field this time around.

Posted by vkogler on 26 Feb 08 12:08 PM EST
These are payers, not providers. Their function in the health care industry is to understand risk and manage costs. I would not want to share information about the specifics of my health care with anyone but another health provider.

Posted by Sabato A. Stile M.D. on 26 Feb 08 08:44 AM EST
I practice Addiction Psychiatry in PA. My concern is more with the limited information I am permitted to give to and get from other Health Care Providers than to Insurers.

Your Turn! Post a public comment (read guidelines):

Name:

Comment:
(limit 200
words)
Enter this word
(help):		 Change

GUIDELINES: 
To keep this feature useful for all, please:

  1. Keep it clean, courteous, and on-topic. Comments are meant for thoughtful discussion of the article published above.

  2. Do not post promotional links to organizations, products or services, or personal requests for assistance (get help).

  3. Proof your comments carefully, use good spelling and punctuation, and don't use ALL CAPS. Comments are published immediately and cannot be edited.

Deceptive, slanderous and commercially-motivated posts are prohibited. We reserve the right to remove comments not conforming to these guidelines. (Report a comment).

Have questions or feedback? Contact us.