American Hospital Association (AHA), Texas Hospital Association, and two nonprofit Texas health systems have filed a lawsuit against the US Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). The lawsuit challenges the recent guidance issued by the Biden administration that prohibits hospitals and medical providers from using website trackers. The controversy surrounding the guidance raises issues related to privacy, healthcare transparency, and the use of technology in the medical sector.
The lawsuit argues that HHS exceeded its authority when it issued the guidance in December. The use of third-party technology companies, such as Google and Meta, to collect and analyze internet protocol (IP) addresses and other visitor information on public-facing healthcare provider websites or apps is at the center of the dispute. The guidance suggests that this kind of data collection could potentially violate the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA), a federal law that protects individuals’ private health information.
Chad Golder, AHA Deputy General Counsel, has emphasized the seriousness of the issue, stating that enforcement actions initiated by HHS under this guidance could result in significant fines for hospitals and medical providers. Violating HIPAA can lead to fines, with each disclosed IP address potentially incurring penalties. This has already led to proposed class action lawsuits against hospitals, alleging mishandling of personal health information through the use of these trackers.
The main point of contention in the lawsuit is the classification of the information collected by third-party trackers. The AHA and its co-plaintiffs are seeking a declaration that this data is not “individually identifiable health information” protected by HIPAA. They are also requesting a permanent injunction to prevent HHS from enforcing the guidance. HHS has not yet responded to the lawsuit.
It is important to note that the HHS guidance only applies to public-facing websites and apps. Patient portals and password-protected sites are exempt. The guidance highlights concerns about the proliferation of trackers on healthcare websites, which can potentially expose sensitive patient data. The AHA and its co-plaintiffs argue that they use trackers for legitimate purposes, such as providing health information videos, translation tools, and mapping technology. Implementing the guidance could force healthcare providers to remove these tools, potentially limiting the information they can share with the public.
One of the key arguments made by the plaintiffs is that the guidance was introduced without allowing medical providers and industry stakeholders to provide feedback or engage in dialogue with HHS. After several unsuccessful attempts to communicate their concerns, the AHA decided to file the lawsuit.
The outcome of this lawsuit will have significant implications for the use of website trackers in the healthcare industry. As the debate continues, it remains to be seen how the court will rule and what impact it will have on healthcare transparency and privacy.
Please note that the information provided in this article is based on publicly available sources and should not be considered legal advice.
I have over 10 years of experience in the cryptocurrency industry and I have been on the list of the top authors on LinkedIn for the past 5 years. I have a wealth of knowledge to share with my readers, and my goal is to help them navigate the ever-changing world of cryptocurrencies.
