This is unbelievable.

[jagec]

Originally posted by: inspire
This violates the concept of informed consent and HIPAA. The Census is completely different. How are you folks not seeing this?

Technically, if they stripped all of the dates down to year-only and changed "county" to "state", it would count as de-identified and no longer be covered by HIPAA.

 

[Doc Savage Fan]

Originally posted by: inspire

Originally posted by: piasabird
Nothing wrong with this except the prior abortions information. Similar kind of information is kept on people receiving financial aid or attending a state school.

What about demographic information on the father?

I wonder how the March of Dimes got all its information on Pre-term birth rates state by state?

I wonder how many abortions some of these late nite talk shows like lettermen cause.

I wonder if this is any worse than the questions on the US Census?

This violates the concept of informed consent and HIPAA. The Census is completely different. How are you folks not seeing this?

I know nothing about the potential legality issues...but isn't a lot of this type of social 'demographic' information already being used in scientific studies? For example, a high incidence of sickle cell anemia among blacks, disease statistics by income level or other factors such as age and gender, etc., etc. I'm not sure why this is considered different. It appears that some may be afraid of what the data may show.

 

[Fern]

I don't see how this set of info could realistically be used to identify any specific person.

Nor do I see why they want the data anyway. What the purpose? The article never said.

Fern

 

[imported_inspire]

Originally posted by: Doc Savage Fan

Originally posted by: inspire

Originally posted by: piasabird
Nothing wrong with this except the prior abortions information. Similar kind of information is kept on people receiving financial aid or attending a state school.

What about demographic information on the father?

I wonder how the March of Dimes got all its information on Pre-term birth rates state by state?

I wonder how many abortions some of these late nite talk shows like lettermen cause.

I wonder if this is any worse than the questions on the US Census?

This violates the concept of informed consent and HIPAA. The Census is completely different. How are you folks not seeing this?

I know nothing about the potential legality issues...but isn't a lot of this type of social 'demographic' information already being used in scientific studies? For example, a high incidence of sickle cell anemia among blacks, disease statistics by income level or other factors such as age and gender, etc., etc. I'm not sure why this is considered different. It appears that some may be afraid of what the data may show.

jagec seems to be on the right trail. I can't say I'm too familiar with tumor registries like you're alluding to, DSF. I do know that the information they maintain is properly anomynized and is not so readily available to the public, if at all.

 

[Ausm]

Originally posted by: Fern
I don't see how this set of info could realistically be used to identify any specific person.

Nor do I see why they want the data anyway. What the purpose? The article never said.

Fern

The purpose imo is they are trying to shame women from having abortions.

 

[dmcowen674]

Originally posted by: Fern
I don't see how this set of info could realistically be used to identify any specific person.

Nor do I see why they want the data anyway. What the purpose? The article never said.

Fern

In the small town in Oklahoma I could easily identify any woman in the town meeting the criteria on the list.

It;s small town so everyone knows already anyway but does that mean it should be online for the whole world to see?

A lot of people own guns in Oklahoma, the politicians should re-consider their actions.
Then again keep this shit up and see what happens boys.

 

[dainthomas]

If I get asked my age/ethnicity when I register software I usually put 80 year old female Pacific Islander. What's to stop these people from using bogus info?

 

[MikeMike]

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: Fern
I don't see how this set of info could realistically be used to identify any specific person.

Nor do I see why they want the data anyway. What the purpose? The article never said.

Fern

In the small town in Oklahoma I could easily identify any woman in the town meeting the criteria on the list.

It;s small town so everyone knows already anyway but does that mean it should be online for the whole world to see?

A lot of people own guns in Oklahoma, the politicians should re-consider their actions.
Then again keep this shit up and see what happens boys.

you will ONLY know if the person is from Oklahoma, or NOT from Oklahoma...

come again?
you wont know their county, their street, hell you wont even know what City they reside near...

 

[MotF Bane]

Originally posted by: MIKEMIKE

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: Fern
I don't see how this set of info could realistically be used to identify any specific person.

Nor do I see why they want the data anyway. What the purpose? The article never said.

Fern

In the small town in Oklahoma I could easily identify any woman in the town meeting the criteria on the list.

It;s small town so everyone knows already anyway but does that mean it should be online for the whole world to see?

A lot of people own guns in Oklahoma, the politicians should re-consider their actions.
Then again keep this shit up and see what happens boys.

you will ONLY know if the person is from Oklahoma, or NOT from Oklahoma...

come again?
you wont know their county, their street, hell you wont even know what City they reside near...

Don't apply reason or sanity to a Dave McOwned post.

 

[shira]

Originally posted by: Doc Savage Fan

Originally posted by: inspire

Originally posted by: piasabird
Nothing wrong with this except the prior abortions information. Similar kind of information is kept on people receiving financial aid or attending a state school.

What about demographic information on the father?

I wonder how the March of Dimes got all its information on Pre-term birth rates state by state?

I wonder how many abortions some of these late nite talk shows like lettermen cause.

I wonder if this is any worse than the questions on the US Census?

This violates the concept of informed consent and HIPAA. The Census is completely different. How are you folks not seeing this?

I know nothing about the potential legality issues...but isn't a lot of this type of social 'demographic' information already being used in scientific studies? For example, a high incidence of sickle cell anemia among blacks, disease statistics by income level or other factors such as age and gender, etc., etc. I'm not sure why this is considered different. It appears that some may be afraid of what the data may show.

There's a vast difference between data being used in medical studies and REQUIRING patients to PROVIDE information that is irrelevant to their treatment.

I'll bet medical studies use data that's a byproduct of what is normally collected to ensure proper treatment (medical histories, for example) and to confirm identity for insurance and payment purposes. And if additional information is desired, I'll bet patient participation is optional (which is why many medical studies offer FREE treatment in return of more comprehensive access to patient information).

If Oklahoma wants to use anonymous information that's a byproduct of the normal medical process, I don't see a problem. But if Oklahoma wants to levy additional requirements on woman to provide the information - even if it's anonymized later - they're overstepping their authority.

 

[shira]

Originally posted by: Zstream
When people are using tax dollars to fund abortion it is the choice of the people to inact such laws.

Actually, current federal law bans the use of federal funds for abortions. And only 17 states provide public funds. I would bet that Oklahoma is not one of those states.

Your point is invalid.

 

[daishi5]

Originally posted by: inspire

Originally posted by: piasabird
Nothing wrong with this except the prior abortions information. Similar kind of information is kept on people receiving financial aid or attending a state school.

What about demographic information on the father?

I wonder how the March of Dimes got all its information on Pre-term birth rates state by state?

I wonder how many abortions some of these late nite talk shows like lettermen cause.

I wonder if this is any worse than the questions on the US Census?

This violates the concept of informed consent and HIPAA. The Census is completely different. How are you folks not seeing this?

I do not see how any of this information qualifies as PHI. Forgive me if I am wrong, but as I recall, HIPAA protects information that can be used to identify the patient like SSN and name, and any documents with those items on them. HIPAA does not protect demographic information, which from what I see is everything on this list. I thought you could release data on patients that had identifiers removed, and things like marital status, education level income level are not identifiers. I will double check our HIPAA policies to see if I can confirm that.

Also, I can see how this demographic information could be helpful if it could be used to target social programs more effectively. However, I seriously doubt they are using this to do something good, so I would prefer to see this stopped unless the states has some decent justification.

Edit: quick update, Examples of information that can not be shared:
Name, address (other than town/city/state), phone, fax, email, SSN, Medical record #, health plan beneficiary #, Account #, certificate or License #, Vehicle identifiers, device identifiers, URLS, IP address (Wow, didn't expect that one), biometric identifiers, and photographs.

If the type of data is not on that list, it can be disclosed under HIPAA laws for research, public health or healthcare operations. And on second thought I can see this data being used in those ways, so I change my mind and have to stick my self firmly in the undecided, some good some bad category.

 

[shadow9d9]

Originally posted by: Jaskalas

Oklahoma women undergoing abortion procedures will be legally forced to reveal:

1) Date of abortion
2) County in which abortion is performed
3) Age of mother
4) Marital status of mother
5) Race of mother
6) Years of education of mother
7) State or foreign country of residence of mother
8) Total number of previous pregnancies of the mother

Sounds like great statistical data. What's wrong with it?

The "forced" part.

 

[shadow9d9]

Originally posted by: Jaskalas

Originally posted by: shira
Sure it's great. But on what basis can you force a woman to reveal this information about herself?

She is not forced. The procedure and its requirements are optional.

One of the dumbest posts ever. The stupidity makes me want to vomit.

 

[Darwin333]

Originally posted by: Doc Savage Fan

Originally posted by: Ausm

Originally posted by: Doc Savage Fan
It lives again!

"I think collecting information like this is going waay to far. imo"

ROFL. Nice commentary...maybe you'll get next year's Nobel prize.

Sorry if you want a blog go elsewhere.

LOL...is it too much to ask for you to be a tad more specific? I can't believe the crap that goes on here.

Come on, the crap gets MUCH deeper around here. I just read a post that both despised and supported rape at the same time. If a company, orginisation or a person does something heinious I can tell you who will support that entity and who will demand that entities head based solely on the political views held by said entity. The vast majority of people here are perfectly willing to overlook serious crime as long as the criminal entity is in their "club". As far as P&N goes, this doesn't even make the crap category.

 

[Equ1n0x]

Originally posted by: shiner
Just to be clear the data that will be posted will NOT include the names of individuals. Hell that's a HIPAA violation. What it will be is basically a statistical database.

Not that it makes it any better, but really it is nothing to get your panties in a wad over and is no different than posting births or deaths in the newspaper.

It most certainly is something "to get my panties in a wad over". How about they publish statistics for STDs, sterility and impotence in men? Your name won't be published, but of course, it will be recorded for statistical evidence.

There is no rational reason to force a woman to relive miscarriages, or to force women to disclose if they have been pregnant but put the child up for adoption. It's no one's business anymore than it is useful statistical information than can be gleaned by knowing how many men are impotent or how many have an STD. That's between a doctor and a patient, and does not belong in a database anywhere that could potentially become compromised.

Even better, let's record your "size", and if you take Viagra. Do you want it floating around in a database somewhere that you are only 2 inches? Your name, of course, won't be published, but it will be recorded.

 

[Fear No Evil]

Its amazing that collecting this information shocks you guys, but scraping the fetus out of a woman.. Thats just freaking AWESOME! They should have 2 for 1 Abortion Happy Hours at Hospitals.

 

[Schadenfroh]

My anger subsided when I saw the data they were collecting was rather statistical (as Jaskalas also mentioned). It would have been wrong to post names, addresses, phone numbers, etc.

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: shiner
Just to be clear the data that will be posted will NOT include the names of individuals. Hell that's a HIPAA violation. What it will be is basically a statistical database.

Not that it makes it any better, but really it is nothing to get your panties in a wad over and is no different than posting births or deaths in the newspaper.

I'm curious, does the state of OK also maintain a public website for posting births and deaths?

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: Fear No Evil
Its amazing that collecting this information shocks you guys, but scraping the fetus out of a woman.. Thats just freaking AWESOME! They should have 2 for 1 Abortion Happy Hours at Hospitals.

Communists also make similar logical errors when defending their love for big government. You're no different from them, you just have a different perception of morality, but the same delusional hypocrisy. Sorry, two wrongs don't make a right.

 

[daishi5]

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: shiner
Just to be clear the data that will be posted will NOT include the names of individuals. Hell that's a HIPAA violation. What it will be is basically a statistical database.

Not that it makes it any better, but really it is nothing to get your panties in a wad over and is no different than posting births or deaths in the newspaper.

I'm curious, does the state of OK also maintain a public website for posting births and deaths?

I could be wrong, but I am almost completely certain that health care providers are required to collect data on births and deaths and report them to the state. In fact, I believe they are required to keep records of all the care they do. How else do you think they determine the rate at which premature babies are delivered based upon ethnicity, income and other things? In fact, the more I think about this the more ok I am with it because it seems to be similar to data collected on other health care procedures. It would help identify if certain parts of the population were more at risk to complications arising from the procedure.

Edit: Just thought of something else, if we collect data like this on live births, and then we allow abortions, why shouldn't we collect the same data? Abortions are an alternative end to a pregnancy, and this data can help control for the changes that abortions will cause in the numbers.

 

[shadow9d9]

Originally posted by: Fear No Evil
Its amazing that collecting this information shocks you guys, but scraping the fetus out of a woman.. Thats just freaking AWESOME! They should have 2 for 1 Abortion Happy Hours at Hospitals.

You mean, killing cells with no brain matter is bad... but breaking our laws on privacy is good?

Braaaaindeaaad.

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: daishi5

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: shiner
Just to be clear the data that will be posted will NOT include the names of individuals. Hell that's a HIPAA violation. What it will be is basically a statistical database.

Not that it makes it any better, but really it is nothing to get your panties in a wad over and is no different than posting births or deaths in the newspaper.

I'm curious, does the state of OK also maintain a public website for posting births and deaths?

I could be wrong, but I am almost completely certain that health care providers are required to collect data on births and deaths and report them to the state. In fact, I believe they are required to keep records of all the care they do. How else do you think they determine the rate at which premature babies are delivered based upon ethnicity, income and other things? In fact, the more I think about this the more ok I am with it because it seems to be similar to data collected on other health care procedures. It would help identify if certain parts of the population were more at risk to complications arising from the procedure.

Edit: Just thought of something else, if we collect data like this on live births, and then we allow abortions, why shouldn't we collect the same data? Abortions are an alternative end to a pregnancy, and this data can help control for the changes that abortions will cause in the numbers.

We're not talking about collecting data here, we're talking about publishing data.

 

[dmcowen674]

Originally posted by: MIKEMIKE

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: Fern
I don't see how this set of info could realistically be used to identify any specific person.

Nor do I see why they want the data anyway. What the purpose? The article never said.

Fern

In the small town in Oklahoma I could easily identify any woman in the town meeting the criteria on the list.

It;s small town so everyone knows already anyway but does that mean it should be online for the whole world to see?

A lot of people own guns in Oklahoma, the politicians should re-consider their actions.
Then again keep this shit up and see what happens boys.

you will ONLY know if the person is from Oklahoma, or NOT from Oklahoma...

come again?
you wont know their county, their street, hell you wont even know what City they reside near...

Hello. I live in a small town in Oklahoma and everyone knows every woman of child bearing years. It would not be hard to figure out from a post online. Hell like I said we would already know before the web posting.

 

[Zorba]

Originally posted by: MIKEMIKE
wtf is the issue with this? there is no name... counties arent exactly small...

1) Date of abortion (no biggie)
2) County in which abortion is performed (oh noes, the people will know what county it was performed in!)
3) Age of mother(oh noes an age!)
4) Marital status of mother(oh noes she could be single! or married!)
5) Race of mother (no dont show the race)
6) Years of education of mother (no dont show the education level)
7) State or foreign country of residence of mother (nooo dont show was state and or COUNTRY she lives in)
8) Total number of previous pregnancies of the mother (oh noes?)

Honestly why are people's panties in a wad?

and need original commentary or lockity lock

Some counties in rural Oklahoma are very small.