President-Elect Obama continues to espouse perceived merits in the computerization of personal medical records, as he did yet again in a speech yesterday morning. The substantial damages of such a system far outweigh any alleged benefits, and the special interests that are pushing so hard for such a system have only their own selfish and financial interests at heart.
A major point to consider is exactly what is in your medical records? Alas, there is much more than just health-care related information - perhaps sensitive, extremely personal information - that may well include details about family relationships, sexual behavior, substance usage and what could be considered by some to be abuse, not to mention extremely private descriptions of thoughts, dreams, and/or fantasies, related during psychotherapy sessions. It goes without saying that any actual disease or serious physical disorder with which you may suffer is of course a private matter. All of this could be placed online, for programmers, technicians, clerks, hackers, and much of the world to see.
Such information is used by lenders in making credit decisions, by prospective employers in making hiring decisions, by insurers making coverage and rate decisions, by colleges in making admissions decisions, and in limitless other social, economic and personal situations.
Why should there be a central database, in Kansas, Alabama, or Wyoming, for example, accessible by AIG in New York, Home Depot in Atlanta, and Bank of America in South Carolina, when you live in in San Diego, Ca. and see no doctor more than 10 miles from your home?
Why should computer savvy paparazzi investigating a celebrity with the same name as you be able to access your personal medical history when looking for dirt on a teen heartthrob?
Why should you be denied insurance for failing to disclose a prior surgery that never happened, because a minimum-wage clerk typed "surgical" area instead of "cervical" area when transcribing your records onto a website (as I once saw done on a client's actual medical report)?
Consider for a moment the effects of such transcription errors as far as medical care is concerned. Transcription errors will happen, and patient records will be wrong. Vital medical care will be based on misinformation, and innocent people will suffer. Dr. X in Cleveland, who treated patient Y a year earlier, can easily examine the written record of last year's treatment, rather than booting up a website hosted in Dallas, to view records transcribed in India.
If you feel strongly about this issue, contact your Senator and Congressperson today, and express you strong belief that personal medical records should not be put into a national database, subject to rampant errors and prying eyes.
Return to Articles Archive