HIPAA and FERPA: The opinion of a street level OT

I am not a lawyer, so stop reading my opinion and go talk to one if you are having a real problem. Please.

But here is my OPINION that I want to rant about:

Everyone needs to go and read the recently published Joint Guidance on the Application of the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA) and the Helath Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (HIPAA) to Student Health Records.

This is the most recent guidance document in a string of legal opinions and guidance documents that have been kicked around since HIPAA came into effect and schools were left trying to figure out what it meant. The bottom line problem is that we have created a system in the United States where a public health program (Medicaid) morphed into a broad funding stream for a variety of educational programs. The original stated purpose of Medicaid was for medically based interventions (and thus its common designation as a 'health insurance' system of sorts) - except that now it also pays for health related services in schools - but those health related services from the school's perspective have to be 'educationally related.'

For background purposes, FERPA came first and is a law governing privacy of educational records. HIPAA came second and is a law governing privacy of protected health information - except that the legal eagles cross-referenced and excluded FERPA from HIPAA in some situations. The confusion exponentially grows since schools are now in the business of billing insurance companies (including Medicaid) for some services. What is left in the confusing aftermath is a pair of legs devoid of a brain, each wondering who is supposed to take the first step forward.

School officials, from my experience, have no idea how to solve the problem - and what ends up happening is that on a regular basis I am witness to information being released to people and places that it should never be released to. The overwhelming majority of the time this release is not malicious but nevertheless it is problematic. Also, parents are infrequently aware of FERPA exclusions to need for consent - and when so-called protected health information is morphed into an educational 'treatment record' that is then FERPA controlled it is interesting to see who can get access to very personal information that someone initially thought was simply a private medical record.

So we have a new guidance document straight from DHHS and DOE. It is quite clear - to lawyers probably and those who like to rant about such things on blogs. People who are on the front lines of this issue will still grapple with the complexity of educational vs. medical records and make many unintentional mistakes. Individuals or parents can always address confidentiality breaches after the fact, but that will invariably leave people dissatisfied and wondering why the system was so vulnerable in the first place.

Our practice: we get consents from EVERYONE for EVERYTHING. We NEVER re-disclose information and only release our own documentation. We also educate families to exercise EXTREME caution in who they decide to give information to. We also don't release ANYTHING unless we have a direct and specific consent or a court order. Sometimes we have even cleared the court orders with our attorney just to be safe.

Let's just call it all broken and start over. Privacy rights should not be so complex and I can absolutely guarantee that individuals are not served well when the waters are this muddy.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

On retained primitive reflexes

Each year I receive several emails from colleagues about 'retained primitive reflexes.'  I am also seeing an increased number of reports from local 'health care' providers who are documenting these alleged problems so I thought I would write a summary of my opinion on this topic.   Predatory 'health care' providers including some OTs, PTs, chiropractors, and behavioral optometrists are creating a new 'market' for treating this alleged 'problem.'  Parents should be very wary of these practitioners and other professionals should challenge these practices whenever they are seen. The following is the kind of information that causes concern and was provided to me by a colleague as a sample from a student's IEP: The student continues to demonstrate the following retained primitive reflexes that at times interfere with his ability to demonstrate appropriate adaptive responses: Fear Paralysis Reflex, Moro Reflex, Palmer Reflex, Tonic Labyri
Read more

Deconstructing the myth of clothing sensitivity as a 'sensory processing disorder'

Please note first that there is no formally recognized clinical designation of  'sensory processing disorder.'   It is a term constructed by occupational therapists that has not been formally recognized by the larger medical community. In our clinic we receive many referrals from local pediatricians when parents have concerns about children being overly sensitive to their clothing.  Most often the children referred are from four to seven years old and the families are severely disrupted by the children's behaviors and responses to clothing issues.  Commonly, children will have severely constricted tolerance for certain outfits, want to wear the same clothes repeatedly, complain that clothing is itchy/scratch/bumpy/wiggly/ouchie, and this all leads to disruption of daily dressing routines.  There is no doubt that the behavioral concerns are very real. The pediatricians tend to be appropriately conservative and provide families with good behavioral management suggestions
Read more

A Critical Appraisal of Therapeutic Listening

Image
History: According to Frick (2002, p. 358), auditory training has been used in Europe since the mid-1900s to address sensory processing disorders and these techniques have been recently popularized in the United States. Frick has based her Therapeutic Listening program on the work of Dr. Alfred Tomatis and Dr. Guy Berard, both of whom are French physicians. Both the Tomatis and Berard programs are delivered by specific machines using earphones but these devices do not have FDA approval and have been banned in the United States (Barrett, 2003). Frick (2001) states “With the advent of new technology, similar altered music has become available on compact disc. The discs do not replace either the Tomatis Method or the Berard Method. The compact discs do provide a less intense way to access both the auditory and vestibular systems to impact neural function and integration and are easily available to clinicians in a variety of practice arenas.” The CDs referenced on Frick’s webpages are ass
Read more