Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

Bobtom42 t1_j18z68r wrote

I'm not a lawyer or a doctor, but I bet the answer is...it depends on the circumstances.

2

Foxfire559 t1_j1964w5 wrote

Generally speaking the only time you would need to sign an authorization for the release of PHI would be for the medical provider to discuss your PHI to someone you designate. Without knowing more about the form/situation it would be hard for anyone to give a better answer.

6

TwinTtoo t1_j19bb0n wrote

Are you sure it wasn’t consent for treatment you refused to sign?

4

itsallbacon t1_j19gz4c wrote

I don’t think you can reasonably expect any practitioner to accept the liability of treating a patient without a clear medical history. Otherwise, yes, other than ERs, you have no right to demand medical treatment anywhere. The only case that can realistically be made is one of discrimination based on a protected class.

7

PurpleSubtlePlan t1_j1b5b4z wrote

How does withholding PHI from someone trying give you medical treatment benefit you?

6

desfluranedreams t1_j1bbbqc wrote

MD here. I believe the answer is unless you fall under the EMTALA rules/need emergency care a doctor can legally refuse to care for you for a variety of reasons and refusal to sign the release would be a good one. PHI release is necessary for appropriate handling of health information in an organization, quality assurance, and for billing reasons.

Caveat: I’m not lawyer and personally haven’t had a patient refuse to sign the release ever

5