Public Comments

Public Comments: October 2011 – WPF urges HHS to do more to protect the privacy of medical research subjects

The World Privacy Forum filed extensive comments with the US Department of Health and Human Services about its proposed changes regarding the rules governing human subject medical research. In the comments, WPF noted that the HHS approach to privacy for research subjects was incomplete and did not use all Fair Information Practices. WPF strongly urged HHS to revise its proposal on a number of issues, including consent and the use of biospecimens in research. The World Privacy Forum is urging HHS to acknowledge that the realm of health data that is truly non-identifiable has shrunken remarkably, for example, biospecimens with DNA cannot be considered non-identifiable anymore. “In our comments, we are requesting that HHS give individuals the opportunity to make choices about the use of their own health data and specimens,” said Executive director Pam Dixon. WPF also stated in its comments that “A central database with identifiable information about participants in human subjects research is a terrible idea.” (See p. 21 of WPF comments.)

Public Comments: August 2011 – Proposed changes to the HIPAA Privacy Rule regarding Accounting of Disclosures under the Health Information Technology for Economic and Clinical Health Act

The World Privacy Forum today filed its comments on the proposed changes to the HIPAA privacy rule, supporting some proposed changes and suggesting additional changes to enhance patient choice. In particular, the WPF supports the new patient right to an access report that has been added (p. 4), and has requested that Health Information Exchanges also be required to provide accountings of disclosures to patients (p. 18). The WPF generally argued that HHS needs to look forward and allow changes in information technology to fully benefit patients by providing the facility for more accounting rather than less (pp. 2-3). If the HIPAA rule gives patients a greater ability to monitor how their information is used and disclosed, patients will pay attention and requests for accounting of disclosures will become more common.

Public Comments: May 2011 – WPF requests more information about Ceridian data breach and the FTC complaint process

The World Privacy Forum filed comments with the Federal Trade Commission regarding its consent decree against Ceridian regarding a substantial data breach. WPF has requested that the Commission present more facts in the case to the public, and has also requested more clarity about the FTC complaint process, noting that it is not a transparent process for the public.

Public Comments: May 2011 – Notice of Proposed Rulemaking for the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act FERPA

The WPF filed detailed comments on the U.S. Department of Education’s notice of proposed changes to the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act. WPF has concerns that the increased sharing of student information that the proposed rule will allow will diminish student privacy in a significant and permanent way. WPF is urging the DOE to amend its proposed rule to establish increased privacy protections for sensitive student information held in databases and elsewhere.

Public Comments: April 2011 – WPF Files Joint Comments on California Health Information Exchanges

California has proposed regulations for health information exchange projects in the state. WPF has submitted comments encouraging more privacy protections, and we are joined in our comments by Privacy Activism and the Center for Digital Democracy. One key request in the comments is that California not allow patient consent to be waived in HIE projects. We are also requesting that California create a unified web listing of its HIE projects for increased transparency and to facilitate patient access to HIE information and policies.