Pharmacies jeopardizing patient privacy

Paul Dansereau wasn't happy about the sharing of his medical information.

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Paul Dansereau thought the information he shared with his doctor and pharmacy was confidential. He was wrong.

A couple of months after being treated for psoriasis through his HMO, Dansereau said he started receiving mailings about other psoriasis treatments.

"I feel that my privacy was violated," Dansereau said. "It seemed pretty clear to me that either the physician or the pharmacy had released my name."

With fewer blockbuster drugs in the pipeline and more competition from generic drug makers, some pharmaceutical companies are paying pharmacies for direct access to the patient.

"In order to provide educational information to patients someone has to pay for it," said Craig Fuller of the National Association of Chain Drug Stores. "And there definitely is a business relationship between the pharmaceutical manufacturer and the pharmacy."

In some cases, that business relationship includes selling lists of patients who take certain drugs. Pharmacies get about $1 for every patient who gets a follow-up letter about medications or treatments and up to $3 for each phone call to a patient.

But Dansereau said he didn't authorize the release of his medical information. Come April 2003, new medical privacy rules will take effect requiring health care providers to tell patients just how their private medical information could be used, bought or sold.

"What it really is designed to do is to put the patient in the driver's seat of saying, 'I know what your practices are, I accept them or I reject them'," said Claude Allen of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. "And in the case of rejecting them then you have the knowledge and the ability to say, 'I will choose to seek my services elsewhere.'"

That's not good enough, say opponents of the new rule. They say when it comes to privacy, the patient's word should be the last word.

Dr. Paul Appelbaum of the American Psychiatric Association agreed. "Traditionally, medical information was never released unless patients gave their consent for it and that's the rule we think should be carried forward."

Patients who don't agree with their providers' practice of passing on medical information can try finding a new provider, or pay out of pocket. A tough proposition for most people -- including Dansereau.

"It's a scary feeling," he said. "I'm self-employed and my wife and I have individual health insurance. We're not part of a big plan. So if we were dropped we'd be scrambling."