Prescription data mining, medical privacy and the First Amendment: the U.S. Supreme Court in Sorrell v. IMS health Inc.

نویسندگان

  • Marcia M Boumil
  • Kaitlyn Dunn
  • Nancy Ryan
  • Katrina Clearwater
چکیده

In 2011, the United States Supreme Court in Sorrell v. IMS Health Inc. struck down a Vermont law that would restrict the ability of pharmaceutical companies to purchase certain physician-identifiable prescription data without the consent of the prescriber. The law's stated purpose was threefold: to protect the privacy of medical information, to protect the public health and to contain healthcare costs by promoting Vermont's preference in having physicians prescribe more generic drugs. The issue before the Supreme Court was whether the Vermont law represented a legitimate, common sense regulatory program or a bold attempt to suppress commercial speech when the "message" is disfavored by the state. Striking down the law, the Supreme Court applied a heightened level of First Amendment scrutiny to this commercial transaction and held that the Vermont law was not narrowly tailored to protect legitimate privacy interests.

برای دانلود متن کامل این مقاله و بیش از 32 میلیون مقاله دیگر ابتدا ثبت نام کنید

ثبت نام

اگر عضو سایت هستید لطفا وارد حساب کاربری خود شوید

منابع مشابه

Sorrell v. IMS Health: issues and opportunities for informaticians

In 2011, the US Supreme Court decided Sorrell v. IMS Health, Inc., a case that addressed the mining of large aggregated databases and the sale of prescriber data for marketing prescription drugs. The court struck down a Vermont law that required data mining companies to obtain permission from individual providers before selling prescription records that included identifiable physician prescript...

متن کامل

Off-label marketing and the First Amendment.

O December 3, 2012, a three­ judge panel of a U.S. appeals court took a controversial leap toward what some fear will be license by the courts to invalidate a host of state and federal regu­ lations, including some applica­ ble to health care. In recent years, the Supreme Court has broadened the reach of the First Amend­ ment, defining “protected speech” in such a way as to curtail or eliminate...

متن کامل

United States v. Jones and the Future of Privacy Law: The Potential Far-Reaching Implications of the GPS Surveillance Case

BY DANIEL J. SOLOVE T he U.S. Supreme Court’s recent decision in United States v. Jones, No. 10-1259 (U.S. Jan. 23, 2012) is a profound decision in Fourth Amendment jurisprudence as well as in privacy law more generally. In this case, FBI agents installed a global positioning system (GPS) tracking device on Jones’s car and monitored where he drove for a month without a warrant. Antoine Jones ch...

متن کامل

An expansion of Right to Choose v. Byrne: public funding for abortions for those buying insurance under the new Health Care Bill.

In 1973, the Supreme Court decided one of the most well-known cases in history—Roe v. Wade. In this landmark decision, the United States Supreme Court held that the constitutional right to privacy extends to a woman’s right to have an abortion. From 1973 through 1977, Medicaid covered the costs of an abortion without restriction. In 1966, Republican Senator Henry Hyde introduced an amendment to...

متن کامل

How Should Health Data Be Used?

Electronic health records, data sharing, big data, data mining, and secondary use are enabling exciting opportunities for improving health and healthcare while also exacerbating privacy concerns. Two court cases about selling prescription data, the Sorrell case in the U.S. and the Source case in the U.K., raise questions of what constitutes "privacy" and "public interest"; they present an oppor...

متن کامل

ذخیره در منابع من


  با ذخیره ی این منبع در منابع من، دسترسی به آن را برای استفاده های بعدی آسان تر کنید

برای دانلود متن کامل این مقاله و بیش از 32 میلیون مقاله دیگر ابتدا ثبت نام کنید

ثبت نام

اگر عضو سایت هستید لطفا وارد حساب کاربری خود شوید

عنوان ژورنال:
  • Annals of health law

دوره 21 2  شماره 

صفحات  -

تاریخ انتشار 2012