Scott Chisholm Lamont, RN.

Listed on:

Search 4 RSS

Yeah, I'm a Technorati member

Weblog Directory Directory of blogs from all around the world.

)O( Green Man

Action needed on Senate Bill 3013, 108th Congress

I received this link of concern through a nursing list I participate in:

"H.R. 3015 Continues War Against Pain Patients and Doctors" by Michael Arnold Glueck, M.D., and Robert J. Cihak, M.D., The Medicine Men, published Tuesday, Nov. 23, 2004

After reading the link, I did a search on the the Library of Congress site (you can also search using http://thomas.loc.gov/home/thomas.html). Sigh. It really is there. I was a little suspicious, as the Medicine Men site leans pretty far in one direction politically, so some of their reports are a little out there, like their interpretation of a study on Shaken Baby Syndrome (they claim it doesn't exist, I've seen kids die from it). However, I found that H.R. 3015 has already passed and is being reviewed in the Senate as S. 3013. I copied the following information from the Senate website . I urge you to call your Senator and ask them to oppose this Orwellian effort. It is intended to decrease diversion of narcotics, but I believe it will cause more harm than good.

Here is the opening text:

108th CONGRESS
2d Session

S. 3013

To provide for the establishment of a controlled substance monitoring program in each State.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES
November 19, 2004

Mr. SESSIONS (for himself, Mr. DURBIN, and Mr. KENNEDY) introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions

and here are the kickers:

SEC. 399O. CONTROLLED SUBSTANCE MONITORING PROGRAM.

(3) The information to be reported under this subsection with respect to the dispensing of a controlled substance shall include the following:

`(A) Drug Enforcement Administration Registration Number of the dispenser.

`(B) Drug Enforcement Administration Registration Number and name of the practitioner who prescribed the drug.

`(C) Name, address, and telephone number of the ultimate user or research subject or such contact information of the ultimate user or research subject as the Secretary determines appropriate.

`(D) Identification of the drug by a national drug code number.

`(E) Quantity dispensed.

`(F) Estimated number of days for which such quantity should last.

`(G) Number of refills ordered.

`(H) Whether the drug was dispensed as a refill of a prescription or as a first-time request.

`(I) Date of the dispensing.

`(J) Date of origin of the prescription .

`(4) The State shall require dispensers to report information under this section in accordance with the electronic format specified by the Secretary under subsection (h), except that the State may waive the requirement of such format with respect to an individual dispenser.

`(e) DATABASE- In implementing or improving a controlled substance monitoring program under this section, a State shall comply with the following:

`(1) The State shall establish and maintain an electronic database containing the information reported to the State under subsection (d).

`(2) The database must be searchable by any field or combination of fields.

`(3) The State shall include reported information in the database in a manner consistent with standards established by the Secretary, with appropriate safeguards for ensuring the accuracy and completeness of the database.

`(4) The State shall take appropriate security measures to protect the integrity of, and access to, the database.

`(j) RELATION TO HIPAA- Except to the extent inconsistent with this section, the provision of information pursuant to subsection (f) and the subsequent transfer of such information are subject to any requirement that would otherwise apply under the regulations promulgated pursuant to section 264(c) of the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996.

So much for the intent of HIPAA - I guess like the rest of federal legislation, it doesn't apply to the House or Senate. Call your Senator. Please. This is not only a completely unwarrented invasion of privacy and a breach of the provider-patient relationship, it appears entirely aimed at intimidation of both the prescribers and those who require pain meds, like chronic pain sufferers.