Skip to content Skip to navigation

Readers want change in confidentiality laws

June 17, 2010
by Lindsay Barba
| Reprints

Prompted by an April 2010 article written by expert Renee Popovits, JD, ( we asked readers how they felt about the current confidentiality law for substance use treatment information (42 CFR, Part 2). The results are in:

Do you think that the current confidentiality law for substance use treatment information (42 CFR, Part 2) ought to be changed?

  • Yes 61.9%
  • No 38.1%

Noteworthy comments from those in favor of change included:

  • “[It is a] barrier to integration strategies and HIT [and] EMR connectivity among direct providers.
  • “There seem[s] to be more secrecy around this than there is around nuclear weapons [and] makes it incredibly challenging to adequately coordinate care.”
  • “New technologies and the need to effectively communicate within a professional network should have been important ten years ago. There are many occasions when the release of information provided by a patient/client and permitted by signature causes excess delay in communications that at times become critical to treatment and patient/client retention and/or redirection in the treatment process.”

Our latest poll, found on the left-hand side of our Web site, is:

What has been your organization’s greatest challenge in implementing an e-prescribing system?

  • Choosing the software
  • Affordability
  • Training the physicians to use the system
  • We don’t use e-prescribing

Share your experiences with e-prescribing in our comments box. For more information about implementing an e-prescribing system, read E-prescribing: Coming your way soon by Dennis Grantham, Senior Editor at


Lindsay Barba

Lindsay Barba was associate editor of Behavioral Healthcare from 2009 to 2010.