 |
 |
Arthur Hirsch wrote: > Lots of questions. I don't have answers. But before we get a count we > need a registry, and before we get a registry of Parkinsonians, these > questions ought to be well considered, if not answered. Most of the privacy objections would be nullified by having the doctor or pharmacist keep all identifying information, such as name, address, phone or SS number) in his confidential files (which he must maintain anyway, PD or no PD). The only purpose of such identification is to avoid duplication or to track status, such as death or changing doctors. For that a number, known only to the doctor or pharmacist, would suffice. Of course a determined lawyer or bureaucrat could drag out the info, by court order if needed, but they can do that now anyway, and only for one patient at a time, not the whole list. In these days, when your motor vehicle agency, registrar of voters, tax assessor, insurance company, banker, credit card sponsor, HMO, magazine publisher, auto dealer, travel agent, realty broker, or who knows what, can sell your identity data to anyone, it seems more than a bit paranoid to worry about an employer discovering that you have PD. Not to mention that you might risk serious liability if you don't tell. As for the DMV, their counter clerks diagnose your PD NOW, just by looking at you. "They don't need no stinkin' doctors!" So, I don't agree that the risks of a registry outweigh the gains. Cheers, Joe J. R. Bruman (818) 789-3694 3527 Cody Road Sherman Oaks, CA 91403-5013