December 31, 1996; Southwest Family Services
12/31/1996 10:14:43 AM
This is an opinion of the Commissioner of Administration issued pursuant to section 13.072 of Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 13 - the Minnesota Government Data Practices Act. It is based on the facts and information available to the Commissioner as described below.
Facts and Procedural History:For purposes of simplification, the information presented by the person who requested this opinion and the response from the government entity with which the person disagrees are presented in summary form. Copies of the complete submissions are on file at the offices of PIPA and, with the exception of any data classified as not public, are available for public access.On November 4, 1996, PIPA received a letter of the same date from L. In his/her letter, L requested that the Commissioner issue an opinion regarding L's access to certain data about L's minor children maintained by Southwest Family Services, hereinafter Southwest. Shortly thereafter, PIPA staff requested additional documentation from L which was provided on November 13, 1996. Attached to L's opinion request were copies of several letters. The first, dated June 13, 1994, is from L to Sharon Kanters of Southwest. In this letter, L requested a copy of all records produced during the treatment of my children. The second letter is dated July 1, 1994, and is addressed to Ms. Kanters from David Himlie, an attorney representing L. In this letter, L's attorney requested a complete copy of your file with regard to your treatment of [L's children]. The third letter is a note dated November 30, 1994, from Ms. Kanters to L, which apparently accompanied a brief summary of the care of one of L's children. The fourth letter, dated January 17, 1995, is from L to Ms. Kanters. L wrote, This letter is my request for release of the records for [L's child]. I am requesting [the] complete file to date... In response to L's request, PIPA, on behalf of the Commissioner, wrote to Sharon Kanters of Southwest. The purposes of this letter dated November 15, 1996, were to inform Ms. Kanters of L's request, and to ask her or Southwest's attorney to provide information or support for Southwest's position. On November 26, 1996, PIPA received a response dated November 22, 1996, from Ms. Kanters. A summary of the facts surrounding this matter is as follows. As documented, L made written requests for access to the medical records of his/her minor children on at least three different occasions. According to L, in response to his request of July 1, 1994, Ms. Kanters contacted my former [spouse] for [his/her] approval. L further wrote, [L's spouse] refused. Ms. Kanters then declined release... L did state that Ms. Kanters, in a letter dated November 30, 1994, provided a summary of the care of one of L's children upon request. However, Ms. Kanters again refused to provide the record pursuant to L's January 17, 1995, request. In response to L's advisory opinion request, Ms. Kanters cited a provision in Minnesota Statutes Section 144.335, which states that a provider may withhold medical information from the patient if the information is detrimental to the physical or mental health of the patient or is likely to cause the patient to inflict self harm, or to harm another.
Ms. Kanters also wrote:
Issue:
In L's request for an opinion, s/he asked the Commissioner to address the following issue:
Discussion:
In Advisory Opinion 96-053, the Commissioner addressed the very same issue that L has raised in this opinion. In this Opinion, as in 96-053, the entity involved is apparently licensed by the Minnesota Department of Human Services as a Rule 29 facility. Rule 29 facilities are subject to the provisions of Minnesota Statutes Section 245.69, subdivision 2(f), and Minnesota Rules Section 9520.0750 - 9520.0870. Minnesota Statutes Section 245.69, subdivision 2(f), states, Data on individuals collected by approved clinics and centers, including written minutes of team meetings, is private data on individuals within the welfare system as provided in chapter 13. Pursuant to Section 9520.0800, subpart 7, client information compiled by a Rule 29 facility, including client records and minutes of case review and consultation meetings must be protected as private data under the Minnesota Government Data Practices Act.
As the Commissioner wrote in 96-053:
Assuming Southwest is a Rule 29 facility, all client data maintained by Southwest about L's minor children are private data subject to the provisions of Chapter 13. Pursuant to Section 13.02, subdivision 8, and Minnesota Rules Section 1205.0500, subpart 2 (B), both parents can gain access to private data about their children unless there is a state law, court order, or legally binding instrument which provides to the contrary. In the present situation, nothing has been presented to suggest that L should be denied access to data about his/her minor children. Ms. Kanter's main argument is based on a provision in Minnesota Statutes Section 144.335, which allows providers to withhold medical information from patients when the provider determines that releasing the data will cause harm to the patient or cause the patient to harm others. However, in this case, it appears her argument is not germane given that Chapter 13, not Minnesota Statutes Section 144.335, controls the classification of, and access to, the data. Opinion:Based on the correspondence in this matter, my opinion on the issue raised by L is as follows:
Signed:
Elaine S. Hansen
Dated: December 31, 1996
|
Data subjects
Educational data
Welfare data
Patient records (144.335, subd. 3a / 144.293)
Social services/welfare data
Rule 29 facilities
