DataBreaches.Net

Menu
  • About
  • Breach Notification Laws
  • Privacy Policy
  • Transparency Report
Menu

More on PHI disclosures and public health emergencies

Posted on October 20, 2014 by Dissent

Via HIPAA Blog, here are two resources related to the issue of how much PHI covered entities can disclose without patient consent in situations like ebola concerns.

The first is from HHS:

Does the HIPAA Privacy Rule permit covered entities to disclose protected health information, without individuals’ authorization, to public officials responding to a bioterrorism threat or other public health emergency?

Answer:

Yes. The Rule recognizes that various agencies and public officials will need protected health information to deal effectively with a bioterrorism threat or emergency. To facilitate the communications that are essential to a quick and effective response to such events, the Privacy Rule permits covered entities to disclose needed information to public officials in a variety of ways.

Covered entities may disclose protected health information, without the individual’s authorization, to a public health authority acting as authorized by law in response to a bioterrorism threat or public health emergency (see 45 CFR 164.512(b)), public health activities). The Privacy Rule also permits a covered entity to disclose protected health information to public officials who are reasonably able to prevent or lessen a serious and imminent threat to public health or safety related to bioterrorism (see 45 CFR 164.512(j)), to avert a serious threat to health or safety). In addition, disclosure of protected health information, without the individual’s authorization, is permitted where the circumstances of the emergency implicates law enforcement activities (see 45 CFR 164.512(f)); national security and intelligence activities (see 45 CFR 164.512(k)(2)); or judicial and administrative proceedings (see 45 CFR 164.512(e)).

Note that the above does not necessarily mean that the covered entity can disclose the patient’s name  to the media or public without the patient’s consent. But my understanding is that public officials can release such information as part of responding to a public health emergency, e.g., if they need to contact and isolate people who may have been in contact with infected patients.  If I’m wrong on that, hopefully some lawyer will let me know.

The second resource, also from HHS, is a decision tool to help covered entities with emergency preparedness disclosures.

Update: Later in the day, I was asked who actually disclosed the first Texas patient’s name. Digging into it, I found that the patient was first identified/named by the Liberian government, and it was reported in the New York Times. In terms of the two Texas nurses later affected, their identities were revealed by their families. The hospital was not the source of their names.


Related:

  • Maintenance Note
  • CISA Alert: Reported Supply Chain Compromise Affecting XZ Utils Data Compression Library, CVE-2024-3094
  • System Status Note
  • System Status Note
  • System Status Note
  • Fraudster's fake data breach claims should remind media to be careful what we report
Category: Uncategorized

Post navigation

← Oz privacy comish says breaches could double this year
Grim statistics: Officials warn 500 million financial records hacked within past 12 months →

Now more than ever

"Stand with Ukraine:" above raised hands. The illustration is in blue and yellow, the colors of Ukraine's flag.

Search

Browse by Categories

Recent Posts

  • Washington Post hack exposes personal data of John Bolton, almost 10,000 others
  • Draft UK Cyber Security and Resilience Bill Enters UK Parliament
  • Suspected Russian hacker reportedly detained in Thailand, faces possible US extradition
  • Did you hear the one about the ransom victim who made a ransom installment payment after they were told that it wouldn’t be accepted?
  • District of Massachusetts Allows Higher-Ed Student Data Breach Claims to Survive
  • End of the game for cybercrime infrastructure: 1025 servers taken down
  • Doctor Alliance Data Breach: 353GB of Patient Files Allegedly Compromised, Ransom Demanded
  • St. Thomas Brushed Off Red Flags Before Dark-Web Data Dump Rocks Houston
  • A Wiltshire police breach posed possible safety concerns for violent crime victims as well as prison officers
  • Amendment 13 is gamechanger on data security enforcement in Israel

No, You Can’t Buy a Post or an Interview

This site does not accept sponsored posts or link-back arrangements. Inquiries about either are ignored.

And despite what some trolls may try to claim: DataBreaches has never accepted even one dime to interview or report on anyone. Nor will DataBreaches ever pay anyone for data or to interview them.

Want to Get Our RSS Feed?

Grab it here:

https://databreaches.net/feed/

RSS Recent Posts on PogoWasRight.org

  • Maryland Privacy Crackdown Raises Bar for Disclosure Compliance
  • Lawmakers Warn Governors About Sharing Drivers’ Data with Federal Government
  • As shoplifting surges, British retailers roll out ‘invasive’ facial recognition tools
  • Data broker Kochava agrees to change business practices to settle lawsuit
  • Amendment 13 is gamechanger on data security enforcement in Israel

Have a News Tip?

Email: Tips[at]DataBreaches.net

Signal: +1 516-776-7756

Contact Me

Email: info[at]databreaches.net
Security Issue: security[at]databreaches.net
Mastodon: Infosec.Exchange/@PogoWasRight
Signal: +1 516-776-7756
DMCA Concern: dmca[at]databreaches.net
© 2009 – 2025 DataBreaches.net and DataBreaches LLC. All rights reserved.