Kenmore Mercy Hospital

The customer complainant, *** ***, has raised allegations against Catholic Health regarding reimbursement for service of processMr*** alleges that he had previously made seven (7) requests to obtain his mother's medical records from Kenmore Mercy Hospital between June , and March
9, 2015, during which time his requests were "ignored, rebuffed and/or misled"Under federal and state law, hospital patients or qualified persons have the right to access their recordsQualified persons include a guardian for an incapacitated adult or minor, and executors and/or administrators of estates for deceased patientsIf the patient is alive and capable of making their own medical decisions, then the patient must provide the hospital with the proper authorization to release their protected health informationIn the current matter subject of the above-listed complaint, the patient's family memberssubmitted several requests for the patient's records that were in violation of federal and state privacy protections as well the New York State Public Health Law (PHL)These attempts included direct requests from family members for the records and by using a health care proxy (HCP) that (1) did not give permission to release records and (2) was not in effect nor enforceable because the patient was still alive and mentally cognizantFor example, Mr*** mailed the hospital a letter on January 30, demanding the patient's medical records and included the HCP and an authorization executed by the patient's designated health care agentHowever, New York's PHL specifies that a HCP- and along with it the health care agent's powers- do not take effect unless an attending physician has made a determination that the patient lacks the capacity to make health care decisionsCatholic Health was never provided with any evidence that the patient had lost the requisite capacity thereby triggering the HCP and thereby empowering the health care agentCatholic Health responded to the family's repeated improper requests via written correspondence and telephone conversationsThe hospital 's health information department repeatedly attempted to educate the family on the appropriate process for requesting medical records. The hospital eventually received a valid authorization dated March 9, for the release of the patient's protected health informationThis authorization was executed by the patientThe hospital thereafter honored the patient's request and sent her medical records via certified mail to a treating physician in Denver, ColoradoThe hospital received back a certification (of receipt) signed by a physician assistant employed by the treating physician's medical groupThe hospital later received additional correspondence from Mr*** stating that his mother's medical records were not received by her physician in DenverThe hospital responded to Mr*** that they had confirmed, via signed certification, that the patient's records were receivedWhile I can understand Mr***'s displeasure with the length of time that transpired before his mother's medical records were released by the hospital, the blame should not fall on Catholic Health for the delaysThe hospital is required to comply with federal and state laws regarding patient privacy and subject to severe punishment by regulatory authorities if the provisions of these laws are not followedI would be happy to provide a more detailed accounting of this process upon requestPlease do not hesitate to contact me if you have any additional questions. Very Truly Yours, Matthew ***, Esq. System Director, Risk Management Catholic Health

Revdex.com:  I need more time to garner data to determine my reply. 5 days is too short. [redacted]