THE PATIENT MEDICAL RECORD & HEALTHCARE RIGHTS ACT

A Petition for Patient Rights, Accurate Medical Records, Independent Grievance Review, and Meaningful Participation in Healthcare

We, the undersigned citizens, patients, caregivers, healthcare professionals, and advocates, respectfully petition our state legislature to enact laws establishing stronger protections for patients in the healthcare system.

PURPOSE

A patient’s medical record can affect treatment, insurance coverage, disability determinations, employment, future medical care, reputation, and how every future healthcare professional understands that patient.

Because medical records can have consequences far beyond the examination room, patients should have a meaningful and enforceable right to challenge information they can demonstrate is false, materially inaccurate, incomplete, misleading, or improperly documented.

Federal law already recognizes a patient’s right to request amendment of protected health information and, when an amendment is denied, the right to submit a statement of disagreement. However, the final decision remains largely within the existing healthcare-record system. We believe state law should provide an independent avenue for resolving serious disputes over the accuracy and integrity of medical records.

WE PETITION FOR THE FOLLOWING RIGHTS:

1. THE RIGHT TO CHALLENGE A MEDICAL RECORD

Every patient shall have the right to formally challenge a statement, diagnosis, characterization, assessment, or other material entry contained in the patient’s medical record when the patient has reasonable grounds and supporting evidence to believe that the information is:

• factually false;
• materially inaccurate;
• materially incomplete;
• misleading;
• improperly attributed to the patient;
• unsupported by the available evidence; or
• documented in a manner that could reasonably cause material harm to the patient’s healthcare, legal rights, benefits, insurance, employment, or reputation.

A patient shall not be required to prove wrongdoing merely to obtain an independent review.

2. THE RIGHT TO AN INDEPENDENT REVIEW

When a healthcare provider or healthcare institution refuses to correct a disputed record, the patient shall have the right to request review by an appropriate independent state-authorized body.

The review shall not be conducted solely by the institution, hospital, medical group, or employer of the healthcare professional whose documentation is being challenged.

The purpose of independent review shall be to protect both patients and healthcare professionals by determining, based upon evidence, whether the disputed information should remain unchanged, be corrected, be supplemented, or be removed as legally permitted.

3. CORRECTION OF PROVEN FALSE INFORMATION

When an independent review determines by the applicable legal standard that information contained in a patient’s medical record is materially false or inaccurate, the responsible healthcare entity shall be required to correct the record.

Where appropriate under state law, the inaccurate entry shall be removed or replaced rather than merely leaving the disputed information in place indefinitely.

The corrected record shall clearly reflect the factual determination and shall not continue to present information that has been officially determined to be false as though it were accurate.

4. PROTECTION AGAINST PERMANENTLY CARRYING FORWARD FALSE INFORMATION

A healthcare organization shall make reasonable efforts to identify other records, systems, healthcare providers, health information exchanges, insurers, or other authorized recipients known to have received the materially inaccurate information when correction is legally required.

The purpose of this requirement is to prevent a proven false statement from continuing to follow a patient throughout the healthcare system.

5. THE PATIENT’S RIGHT TO PARTICIPATE IN THEIR OWN HEALTHCARE

Patients shall have a meaningful right to participate in decisions concerning their healthcare.

This includes the right, consistent with applicable law and clinical circumstances, to:

• receive understandable information about diagnoses and treatment;
• ask questions and receive meaningful answers;
• participate in treatment decisions;
• obtain relevant medical records;
• seek second opinions;
• challenge materially inaccurate information;
• provide evidence relevant to their medical history;
• identify factual errors in their records; and
• have their documented concerns considered in good faith.

Patient participation shall not be treated as interference with medical care merely because a patient questions a diagnosis, documentation, treatment recommendation, or professional opinion.

6. INDEPENDENT STATE GRIEVANCE PROCEEDINGS

A serious patient grievance involving professional conduct, materially false documentation, patient rights, or potential violations of professional standards should have access to an independent state process.

A healthcare institution should not be the final authority over a grievance concerning one of its own healthcare professionals when the grievance involves the integrity of the institution’s own records, policies, personnel, or actions.

The state should establish an independent process, either through the existing state medical licensing authority or another legally designated governmental body, capable of:

• receiving patient complaints;
• reviewing supporting documentation;
• obtaining appropriate records;
• conducting impartial investigations;
• allowing the patient a meaningful opportunity to present evidence;
• allowing the healthcare professional an opportunity to respond;
• determining whether professional standards or state law were violated; and
• imposing legally authorized disciplinary or corrective measures when violations are substantiated.

7. ACCOUNTABILITY FOR PROFESSIONAL MISCONDUCT

Healthcare professionals are entrusted with extraordinary responsibility and authority over patients.

That authority must be accompanied by accountability.

When a licensed healthcare professional is found, through appropriate due process, to have knowingly falsified records, intentionally misrepresented material facts, engaged in professional misconduct, retaliated against a patient for exercising protected rights, or otherwise violated enforceable professional standards, the appropriate state licensing authority should have authority to impose consequences authorized by law.

Potential consequences should be proportionate to the severity and circumstances of the violation and may include education, corrective action, probation, fines where authorized, suspension, or other disciplinary measures authorized under state law.

This provision shall protect healthcare professionals from punishment based merely upon a disagreement with a medical opinion. The issue must involve a violation of an enforceable legal or professional duty established by law.

8. PROTECTION FOR GOOD-FAITH PATIENT COMPLAINTS

A patient shall not be punished, denied appropriate care, threatened, intimidated, or retaliated against merely for:

• filing a good-faith grievance;
• requesting correction of a medical record;
• requesting a second opinion;
• questioning a diagnosis;
• requesting access to records;
• providing evidence contradicting a medical record; or
• exercising rights established by state or federal law.

Nothing in this provision shall prevent a healthcare professional or institution from documenting legitimate clinical concerns or responding to a complaint through lawful procedures.

9. DUE PROCESS FOR BOTH PATIENTS AND HEALTHCARE PROFESSIONALS

These reforms shall not create an automatic presumption that either a patient or healthcare professional is correct.

The purpose is to establish a fair process.

Patients should not have to defeat an entire healthcare institution simply to have credible evidence heard.

Healthcare professionals should not face discipline merely because a patient disagrees with a clinical judgment.

Evidence, documentation, professional standards, applicable law, and due process should determine the outcome.

10. TRANSPARENCY OF GRIEVANCE OUTCOMES

When legally permissible and consistent with privacy requirements, patients should receive a written explanation of the outcome of a grievance, including:

• the issues reviewed;
• the evidence considered;
• the determination reached;
• the reasons for that determination; and
• any corrective or disciplinary action authorized by law.

Patients should not be left without an explanation after bringing a serious, documented grievance.

OUR PRINCIPLE

A medical record should be a record of the patient’s healthcare — not an unquestionable statement of authority.

Doctors and other healthcare professionals deserve respect, independence, and protection from frivolous accusations.

Patients deserve those same protections.

The answer is not to remove medical judgment from medicine.

The answer is to establish a fair system in which medical judgment can be questioned, evidence can be presented, mistakes can be corrected, professional misconduct can be investigated independently, and patients can meaningfully participate in their own care.

No person should have an unchecked ability to place materially false information into another person’s permanent healthcare history and leave that person without a meaningful avenue to challenge it.

No healthcare institution should be the sole judge of a serious grievance involving its own personnel or conduct.

And no patient should lose their voice simply because the person writing the medical record has greater institutional authority.

THEREFORE, WE PETITION OUR STATE GOVERNMENT

We respectfully request that the Legislature enact comprehensive patient-rights legislation establishing:

1. A meaningful right to challenge materially inaccurate medical records;
2. An independent process for resolving serious medical-record disputes;
3. Correction or removal, as authorized by law, of information proven to be materially false;
4. Protection against the continued propagation of proven inaccurate information;
5. Greater patient participation in healthcare decisions;
6. Independent state-level grievance proceedings;
7. Accountability for substantiated professional misconduct;
8. Protection against retaliation for good-faith patient complaints;
9. Due process and evidentiary protections for both patients and healthcare professionals; and
10. Transparency and written explanations of grievance outcomes.

We ask our elected representatives to recognize that patients are not merely recipients of healthcare. Patients are participants in healthcare and citizens with rights.

We therefore call upon the state legislature to turn these principles into enforceable law.

A patient’s voice should not disappear when the medical record is written.

A patient’s rights should not end at the examination-room door.

Healthcare works best when patients and healthcare professionals are both heard, both protected, and both accountable under the law.

PETITION

By electronically signing this petition, I support legislation establishing stronger patient rights concerning medical records, participation in healthcare, independent grievance review, and accountability for substantiated professional misconduct.

I respectfully ask my state legislators to consider and enact legislation consistent with these principles.