ILNews

DTCI: Protection of drug and alcohol treatment records

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

dtci-drenth-marianLawyers representing plaintiffs and defendants in civil tort actions will eventually be challenged with protecting their client’s alcohol and drug treatment records from disclosure. In most cases, a person’s alcohol and drug treatment records are considered confidential and non-discoverable. The Public Health Service Act, 42 U.S.C. § 290dd-2(a) (Westlaw 2011), bars access to an individual’s alcohol and drug treatment records and relieves a party to litigation from answering questions regarding such treatment.

dtci-schumann-dane Congress passed the PHSA to provide addicts an incentive to seek treatment by eliminating the threat of an adverse party’s use of their efforts to obtain treatment against them. The act’s penalties provision for violations clearly illustrates Congress’ intent to vigorously protect substance abuse treatment records. Carr v. Allegheny Health, Education and Research Foundation, 933 F. Supp. 485(W.D. Penn. 1996).

The PHSA provides that patient records pertaining to substance abuse treatment are confidential and not discoverable, subject to limited exceptions. Confidentiality applies if the records sought to be disclosed were obtained from a program “which is conducted, regulated, or directly or indirectly assisted by any department or agency of the United States.” 42 U.S.C. § 290dd-2(a) (Westlaw 2011).

The PHSA’s regulations dictate that this privilege extends to any information about alcohol and drug abuse that patients obtained by a “federally assisted” program. Coverage includes, but is not limited to, those treatment or rehabilitation programs, employee assistance programs, programs within general hospitals, school-based programs, and private practitioners who hold themselves out as providing – and do provide – alcohol or drug abuse diagnosis, treatment or referral for treatment. However, these regulations do not apply, for example, to emergency room personnel referring a patient to the intensive care unit for an apparent overdose. The privilege still applies if the provider is making the referral to obtain a substance abuse diagnosis, treatment or referral and they are identified as providing such services.

Substance abuse treatment records are presumed confidential. Therefore, the bar to overcome this presumption is high. Mosier v. American Home Patient, 170 F. Supp. 2d 1211, 1214-15 (N.D. Fla. 2001). In Mosier, a federal court held that there was no good cause where a defendant-employer requested production of a former employee’s treatment records to defend against a wrongful termination suit, despite the court’s acknowledgment that the records were highly relevant and important to the employer’s defense. The defendant-employer presented testimony from a supervisor that he suspected the employee was drunk at work because the employee appeared disheveled, smelled like alcohol, exhibited strange behavior, turned in work late, and the employee was impaired at the end of his tenure. The court found that this evidence was insufficient to support a finding of good cause to release the employee’s prior alcohol treatment records for treatment that was received approximately six years before his employment. Mosier, 170 F. Supp. 2d. at 1214.

What is required to obtain disclosure of alcohol and drug treatment records? 42 C.F.R. § 2.64 delineates the process for disclosure of patient records, requiring that the person seeking disclosure has a legally recognized interest in the records. A subpoena alone is insufficient. A court order is necessary. Further, disclosure may be ordered under 42 C.F.R. § 2.64 only if the court determines that good cause exists. To make this determination, the court must find that (1) other ways of obtaining the information are unavailable or would be ineffective and (2) the public interest and need for the disclosure outweigh the potential injury to the patient, the physician-patient relationship and the treatment services.

If a court orders disclosure of a litigant’s treatment records, restrictions will apply on that disclosure pursuant to 42 C.F.R. § 2.12. Upon granting such an order, the court must determine which portions of the records are necessary to fulfill the objective of the disclosure. In addition, the court must impose appropriate safeguards against unauthorized disclosure, limiting the disclosure to only those persons whose need for the information formed the basis for the order.

This is a brief synopsis of the PHSA, which is an extensive act. Attorneys should familiarize themselves with the sections of the PHSA when faced with discovery seeking the disclosure of an individual’s alcohol and drug treatment records in order to properly enforce the privileges provided by the act.•

__________

Marian Drenth is a partner at O’Neill McFadden & Willett in Dyer, Ind., and sits on the DTCI board of directors. She concentrates her practice in civil litigation with an emphasis in health care litigation. Her practice also includes employment law and general liability. Dane Schumann is an associate at O’Neill McFadden & Willett. He focuses his practice on health care and general liability. The opinions expressed in this article are those of the authors.

ADVERTISEMENT

  • wrongful disclosure happens often
    I am a long time supporter of the rights of recovering people. I read a letter to the editor in a newspaper, the letter was written by the current judge . It was a letter about his campaign for reelection.He chose to write abou a recent case and his sentencing the defendant ( state vt Man's surname) There had been some ba cklash by his opponent and the smal l town gossip, because thean hadt a long history of substance related crime. The judge wrote in this public letter that he sentenced this man to a n iinpatientsubstance abuse treatment center to help a felon break the cycle of his addiction. He wrote that tjean was doing well in his treatment. This is a small town, and although he identified the manby last name only, the judge knew he identified this man . I was shocled that an Indiana judge would do this. This man is new to recovery, trying to, literally , save his life. This disclosure was made to gain votes. I was also shocked that a newspaper would print this in a paper. Short of the judge riding a horse through town with a bullhorn, I do not know how he could have made a bigger disclosure What can be done in a situation such as this. Is the judge or the newspaper responsible?

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in Indiana Lawyer editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Indiana State Bar Association

Indianapolis Bar Association

Evansville Bar Association

Allen County Bar Association

Indiana Lawyer on Facebook

facebook
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. The fee increase would be livable except for the 11% increase in spending at the Disciplinary Commission. The Commission should be focused on true public harm rather than going on witch hunts against lawyers who dare to criticize judges.

  2. Marijuana is safer than alcohol. AT the time the 1937 Marijuana Tax Act was enacted all major pharmaceutical companies in the US sold marijuana products. 11 Presidents of the US have smoked marijuana. Smoking it does not increase the likelihood that you will get lung cancer. There are numerous reports of canabis oil killing many kinds of incurable cancer. (See Rick Simpson's Oil on the internet or facebook).

  3. The US has 5% of the world's population and 25% of the world's prisoners. Far too many people are sentenced for far too many years in prison. Many of the federal prisoners are sentenced for marijuana violations. Marijuana is safer than alcohol.

  4. My daughter was married less than a week and her new hubbys picture was on tv for drugs and now I havent't seen my granddaughters since st patricks day. when my daughter left her marriage from her childrens Father she lived with me with my grand daughters and that was ok but I called her on the new hubby who is in jail and said didn't want this around my grandkids not unreasonable request and I get shut out for her mistake

  5. From the perspective of a practicing attorney, it sounds like this masters degree in law for non-attorneys will be useless to anyone who gets it. "However, Ted Waggoner, chair of the ISBA’s Legal Education Conclave, sees the potential for the degree program to actually help attorneys do their jobs better. He pointed to his practice at Peterson Waggoner & Perkins LLP in Rochester and how some clients ask their attorneys to do work, such as filling out insurance forms, that they could do themselves. Waggoner believes the individuals with the legal master’s degrees could do the routine, mundane business thus freeing the lawyers to do the substantive legal work." That is simply insulting to suggest that someone with a masters degree would work in a role that is subpar to even an administrative assistant. Even someone with just a certificate or associate's degree in paralegal studies would be overqualified to sit around helping clients fill out forms. Anyone who has a business background that they think would be enhanced by having a legal background will just go to law school, or get an MBA (which typically includes a business law class that gives a generic, broad overview of legal concepts). No business-savvy person would ever seriously consider this ridiculous master of law for non-lawyers degree. It reeks of desperation. The only people I see getting it are the ones who did not get into law school, who see the degree as something to add to their transcript in hopes of getting into a JD program down the road.

ADVERTISEMENT