Medical roundup

  • Burdensome though it is in other ways, HIPAA does not create a private right of action, so no big-ticket damage suits. Connecticut high court rides to rescue by creating new tort for breach of medical confidentiality [Steven Boranian, Drug and Device Law]
  • Details of cases aside, once again, should federal law really be requiring healthcare employers to grant religious exemptions to staff unwilling to undergo flu vaccination? [Department of Justice press release on suit against Ozaukee County, Wisconsin; earlier on EEOC settlement against North Carolina hospital]
  • First Amendment should come into play when FDA bans drug providers from making truthful statements about their therapies [Henry Miller and Gregory Conko, Reason] And a Cato panel discussion on FDA regulation of speech with former Vascular Solutions CEO Howard Root (author of “Cardiac Arrest”), Christina Sandefur of the Goldwater Institute, and Jessica Flanigan of the University of Richmond, moderated by Cato’s Michael Cannon;
  • “Uberizing Nonemergency Medical Transportation” [Ann Marie Marciarille, Prawfsblawg]
  • “Protecting Reasonable Physician Choice in Medical Product Cases” [Luther Munford, Drug and Device Law]
  • Britain’s National Health Service lurches toward crisis in negligence payouts [BBC, Paul Goldsmith, Centre for Policy Studies]


  • Regarding the Connecticut case: if this isn’t a legal version of a Catch-22 (or darned if you do, darned if you don’t)….seems to me the doctor’s lawyer should win this on appeal to a higher court (it’s a shame he couldn’t haul the state Supreme Court up to get Rule 11 sanctions against the entire Court).

  • The regulations require a health care provider to either notify the patient or bring a motion for a protective order before releasing information in response to a subpoena not issued by a court. Not really a catch 22. In my state, the patient must already be notified before a party issued subpoena is served.