Just say no

Something else from the "I missed it during my time in the phoneless desert" file.

On February 12 I mentioned the attempts by the Injustice Department to force a number of hospitals to hand over confidential patient data about their abortions in response to a suit challenging a ban on a method of late-term abortion called intact dilation and extraction. It turns out hospitals weren't the only targets; Planned Parenthood, another party to the suit, has also seen its clinics hit with demands for confidential patient information - and at least one such clinic is going to the mat, as reported by TheSanDiegoChannel.com on February 27.

San Diego, CA - The San Diego chapter of Planned Parenthood said it will not comply with a court order demanding it hand over hundreds of confidential medical records to the Justice Department, 10News reported. ...

"Rest assured Planned Parenthood will not release the names of any of our patients. We value the trust the community has given us and we will not violate patient privacy," said Planned Parenthood President and CEO Mark Salo. ...

"We're getting calls in our centers and our front reception desk from terrified patients saying, 'Will my name be given to the Justice Department?' Our answer to the question is, 'No,'" Salo said.

The DOJ claims it needs to information to defend the law, but that is nonsense. The law involves late-term abortions, but the subpoena demands "all records of surgical abortions performed 20 weeks after the last menstrual period in the last year," according to the news report, most of which information is not even relevant to the issue. Rather, the Ashcroft crew is engaging in what could only be called intimidation via subpoena, trying to bully abortion providers (and terrify abortion recipients) into dropping the suit with the threat of exposure of privileged information.

My gosh, these people are scummy.

Footnote: Link via Daily News Online.

Update: A federal judge in San Francisco has rejected a DOJ demand for access to abortion records from a public hospital there and from six Planned Parenthood affiliates in the county, says the New York Times for Saturday.

The judge, Phyllis J. Hamilton, said forcing the providers to turn over the records would undermine the privacy rights of patients and could dissuade some from seeking treatment.

"There is no question that the patient is entitled to privacy and protection," Judge Hamilton said. "Women are entitled to not have the government looking at their records."

This doesn't affect the San Diego subpoena directly, but it does provide a precedent to give weight to an appeal.

The Times article also notes how, in pursuing these demands, the Bush administration is going back on its own pledges to protect patient privacy. As I said in my original post, "in the world of Bush, ideology always trumps decency."