Fourth Amendment Protections of Prescription Drug Monitoring Programs: Patient Privacy in the Opioid Crisis.


Journal

American journal of law & medicine
ISSN: 0098-8588
Titre abrégé: Am J Law Med
Pays: England
ID NLM: 7509572

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
11 2020
Historique:
entrez: 8 1 2021
pubmed: 9 1 2021
medline: 24 3 2021
Statut: ppublish

Résumé

The opioid crisis is one of the largest public health problems in the history of the United States. Prescription drug monitoring programs ("PDMPs")-state databases containing the records of all prescriptions for controlled substances written in the state-have emerged as a means to track opioid prescribing and use. While PDMPs are typically used as a tool for physicians to inform their prescribing practices, many states also permit law enforcement to access PDMPs when investigating controlled substance distribution, often without prior judicial approval. Such law enforcement use of PDMPs raises serious questions of patient privacy. The Fourth Amendment protects individuals from unreasonable searches and seizures where they have a reasonable expectation of privacy and has been interpreted to require law enforcement have probable cause and a search warrant before infringing upon an individual's reasonable expectation of privacy. Several courts have held that patients have no reasonable expectation of privacy, or a severely diminished expectation of privacy, in their prescription drug records held in PDMPs. As support, courts rely on the third-party doctrine because the information is disclosed to physicians and then held by the state; the highly regulated nature of the prescription drug industry; and the statutory framework of the Controlled Substances Act. Such analysis disregards patients' expectation of privacy in their personal health information, the confidentiality in the physician-patient relationship, and the resulting patient incentives not to seek care. Therefore, this Article argues that law enforcement must have probable cause and a search warrant to access PDMPs because the exceptions to the Fourth Amendment's probable cause and warrant requirements do not apply.

Identifiants

pubmed: 33413012
doi: 10.1177/0098858820975531
doi:

Substances chimiques

Analgesics, Opioid 0
Controlled Substances 0

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

375-411

Auteurs

Ryan Knox (R)

Senior Research Fellow, Solomon Center for Health Law and Policy at Yale Law School. J.D., 2019, New York University School of Law; B.S., Health Science, 2016, Boston University. For helpful conversations and comments on earlier drafts of this article and the moot court problem which inspired this article, I would like to thank Nicholas Bagley, Mary Ann Chirba, Ariel Geist, Randy Hertz, Orin Kerr, Sylvia Law, Madhu Swarna, the staff of the N.Y.U. Moot Court Board, the judges and competitors in the 2019 Wendell F. Grimes Moot Court Competition at Boston College Law School, and the staff and anonymous peer reviewer of the American Journal of Law and Medicine. An extra special thank you to Mary Ann Chirba, who supervised my work on the moot court problem that inspired this piece and gave extensive comments on earlier drafts of this article. All opinions and errors are my own.

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH