Fri Apr 13, 2012, 08:30 PM
Tx4obama (28,869 posts)
State Agency May Publicize Detailed Information About Abortion PatientsThe Texas Department of State Health Services (DSHS) has proposed new rules requiring abortion facilities to collect and report even more information on their patients than they already do. That may sound familiar, because Republican state Rep. Bill Zedler of Arlington hoped to implement changes like these in the last legislative session—but his proposal died in committee. So Zedler skipped the legislative process and asked DSHS to collect the information anyway. They seem ready to comply. At an April 5 stakeholder meeting, DSHS heard concerns from “about 20 abortion providers, pro-choice advocates and clinic workers,” as Andrea Grimes reported at the pro-choice blog RH Reality Check. DSHS Health Care Quality Section Director Renee Clack told the crowd that the meeting was mainly about Texas’ new mandatory sonogram law and exclusion of Planned Parenthood from state funding, but also to cover “some amendments the department has included that specifically relate to a request by representative Zedler.” Carrie Williams, a press officer for DSHS, confirms Zedler’s involvement. “During special session,” she told the Observer, “Representative Zedler offered an amendment to SB 7 that would have added additional reporting requirements for abortion providers. The amendment wasn’t added to the bill, but at the same time, DSHS agreed to look at the additional requirements and determine what elements could possibly be adopted by rule.” <SNIP> Full article here: http://www.texasobserver.org/cover-story/state-agency-may-publicize-detailed-information-about-abortion-patients
|
7 replies, 824 views
Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
| Author | Time | Post | |
| Tx4obama | Apr 2012 | OP | |
| Downwinder | Apr 2012 | #1 | |
| Warpy | Apr 2012 | #7 | |
| my2sense | Apr 2012 | #2 | |
| kestrel91316 | Apr 2012 | #4 | |
| SoCalNative | Apr 2012 | #3 | |
| southernyankeebelle | Apr 2012 | #5 | |
| GeorgeGist | Apr 2012 | #6 |
Response to Tx4obama (Original post)
Fri Apr 13, 2012, 08:35 PM
Downwinder (7,124 posts)
1. Wouldn't this be a violation of HIPPA?
Response to Downwinder (Reply #1)
Fri Apr 13, 2012, 09:19 PM
Warpy (69,133 posts)
7. Not if it's anonymous
|
The only problem arises if there is so much information that it would be easy to guess a patient's identity (city and street of residence, number of children, etc.) and laws that were that broad have been struck down as violations of HIPAA.
However, this is just more slut shaming by the state of Texas. I know a lot of Texan women and they are all paying attention. |
Response to Tx4obama (Original post)
Fri Apr 13, 2012, 08:40 PM
my2sense (2,608 posts)
2. This is absurd
|
What's next - do we have to wear burkas?
|
Response to my2sense (Reply #2)
Fri Apr 13, 2012, 08:42 PM
kestrel91316 (45,386 posts)
4. No. Women who get abortions will have to wear scarlet depictions of mutilated fetuses....
|
And presumably the letter "M" for murderer.
|
Response to Tx4obama (Original post)
Fri Apr 13, 2012, 08:41 PM
SoCalNative (1,742 posts)
3. Wouldn't this be a major HIPAA violation?
|
?
|
Response to Tx4obama (Original post)
Fri Apr 13, 2012, 08:54 PM
southernyankeebelle (10,699 posts)
5. I hope the add the mens names also.
Response to Tx4obama (Original post)
Fri Apr 13, 2012, 09:01 PM
GeorgeGist (9,538 posts)

