Police and medical information

In general, laws shielding Americans’ medical records constitute a positive (and rare) victory for privacy. But, taken to extremes, they can work against a patient’s best interests, and the public’s as well.

During its past session, the Rhode Island General Assembly approved a sensible measure to ease the state’s Health Care Confidentiality Law. Written in 1978 and updated over time, the law is even more restrictive than the often-frustrating federal Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA), effective since 2003.

Under Rhode Island’s previous law, police officers too often were barred from acquiring pertinent information. For instance, hospitals refused to disclose whether crime victims had been brought in dead or alive. They would not confirm whether a person reported missing was actually in the hospital. Nor could medical personnel report suspicious ailments (in one case, a possible poisoning). Sometimes crucial evidence was destroyed.

Police departments asked to approve gun possession might not learn of relevant mental health evaluations. Sometimes, the person who harmed a patient was in charge of the patient’s care. But medical providers, fearful of breaking the law, would remain silent.

The problem was that, except in cases involving shootings or child abuse, providers could release information only with consent from the patient, or the patient’s family. Often, of course, a patient is in no condition to help. Family members may not understand their rights, or appreciate their obligations.

Under legislation just passed, and signed by Governor Chafee, medical providers will be able to share more information with the police. They may do so when necessary to alert officers to a crime, or to the possible identity or location of a perpetrator.

Providers may now supply a patient’s ID, the type and time of injury, and the time of death. (Under the previous law, police could only verify a death through the medical examiner.) Any additional information would require the patient’s permission. But, in cases of incapacitation, providers could disclose more if they believed it was in the patient’s best interest. They may also report information they believe is evidence of a crime committed at a health-care facility.

All of these measures pose minimal harm to privacy, while promoting public safety. They should ease frustration among medical providers and law-enforcement agencies alike. Most importantly, they should improve crime victims’ odds of securing justice.



Submit an Op-Ed

Submit a letter to The Editor

Contact Us


Re-engineered for your smart phone.
Experience our new mobile website today!
camp plus kids equals smile
Providence Journal Summertime Fund Donate
summer fun planning made easy
check out our summer guide now!