CIPS signs on to amicus brief to support patient privacy rights in the case of Maryland State Board of Physicians V. Harold Eist, M.D.

The CIPS board has voted to join more than forty other health care professional associations and consumer groups as "friends of the court" by signing on to an amicus brief supporting Dr. Harold Eist and the protection of privacy rights against demands for unlimited access to patient records by state regulatory boards.

The amicus brief will be filed with the Maryland Court of Appeals this month by Washington DC attorney, Jim Pyles, Esq., of Powers, Pyles, Sutter & Verville, P.C., Jim Pyles is legal counsel to APsaA which is one of the forty plus groups signed on to the amicus brief.

The case of Maryland State Board of Physicians v. Eist is one of several important battlefronts in the national efforts of allied health care professions and consumer groups to protect patient privacy rights against incursions by the federal government, state regulatory agencies, and insurance companies.

In brief, Harold Eist is a Maryland psychiatrist who was treating a woman and her two children. Following an accusation by the woman's estranged husband that Dr. Eist was overmedicating the three patients, the Maryland State Board of Physicians demanded that Dr. Eist, turn over the case records of three patients to permit a review of accusation. Although Dr. Eist was completely exonerated of the underlying allegation of providing substandard care, he was sanctioned for heeding the wishes of his patients that he not disclose their entire psychiatric records.

In over five years of litigation, there have been five legal decisions in support of Dr. Eist and his stand for patient confidentiality and professional ethics. Following each decision, however, the Maryland Board of Physicians has appealed it's case to a higher court. The most recent finding was issued on September 13, 2007 when the Maryland Court of Special Appeals once again upheld the findings of the lower courts that Dr. Eist that had acted reasonably in protecting the Constitutional right to privacy of his patients Following this most recent ruling, the Maryland State Board of Physicians once again appealed. The case will now be heard the Maryland Court of Appeals.

The amicus brief to be filed this month is based on an earlier amicus brief that was filed with the Court of Special Appeals. The brief contains specific recommendations regarding the balancing of patient privacy rights with the state's need for access to confidential information. These recommendations had been included in the ruling of the Court of Special Appeal. Patient privacy rights activists are hopeful that the findings of the lower court should be upheld by the Court of Appeals, which is Maryland's highest court.

For more information, including a memorandum to the CIPS board from Jim Pyles, the text of the amicus brief filed with the Maryland Court of Special Appeals and the ruling of that court, click on the links below. For additional information on the Eist case as well as other critical challenges to the confidentiality of health care records, see the website of the Patient Privacy Rights Foundation at www.patientprivacyrights.org

• Memorandum from Jim Pyles to the CIPS Board (January 22, 2008)
• Amicus brief filed with the Maryland Court of Special Appeals
• Ruling of the Maryland Court of Special Appeals