Where I Stand — Mike O’Callaghan: Needed medical privacy

Tuesday, June 8, 1999 | 9:31 a.m.

Mike O'Callaghan is the Las Vegas Sun executive editor.

NEVADA STATE Athletic Commissioner Lorenzo J. Fertitta, according to legislative committee minutes, did an outstanding job when promoting Assembly Bill 467. Although Fertitta didn't get everything he wanted because of the Nevada Legislature's watering-down procedure, he did make badly needed progress.

Under pressure from the media, Nevada courts allowed boxer Mike Tyson's psychological and physical medical records to be made public and spread across the Internet. This cast a negative view of Nevada's lack of concern over the privacy people expect to be shown when their records are discussed by anybody but their family physicians.

The American Medical Association Code of Medical Ethics states, "The confidentiality of physician-patient communications is desirable to assure free and open disclosure by the patient to the physician of all information needed to establish a proper diagnosis and attain the most desirable clinical outcome possible. Protecting the confidentiality of the personal and medical information in such medical records is also necessary to prevent humiliation, embarrassment or discomfort of patients. At the same time, patients may have legitimate desires to have medical information concerning their care and treatment forwarded to others."

Tyson's Las Vegas attorney, Jim Jimmerson, told Nevada courts that "there is no true and genuine public interest which would outweigh the harm to plaintiff in releasing these records. Clearly the media may seek these records to satisfy the public's morbid curiosity regarding plaintiff, and may oppose their confidentiality, yet many media members also find disclosure of these personal records abhorrent and truly unnecessary. ... However, simply because there is an appetite to disregard a person's privacy does not mean this court should sate it. Perhaps the public needs to look inside themselves to decide why they would want access to this information. ..."

Despite these and other arguments, Tyson's records were made public and several responsible Nevadans saw the danger this posed to the privacy of their own medical records. From these and other concerns the NSAC and Assemblyman David Goldwater produced AB467 to bring up Nevada medical privacy standards to those of other states. In the future other states and governmental entities will have less reason to deny medical records to NSAC.

Section 1(a) states that the commission shall keep confidential "any information that it receives concerning an applicant for the issuance of a license pursuant to this chapter which is declared confidential by law and that is provided to the commission by another governmental entity."

Overall it's a good bill that also makes confidential "any information contained in a medical record of such an applicant, if the information is not relevant to the commission in determining whether to grant a license to the applicant."

What may become interesting will be what commissioners determine is relevant in making their decision. There also is the possibility that the media or others will challenge why they didn't get information their "experts" believe was used to make a decision. When this happens, a future Nevada Legislature will be called upon to strengthen the new law.