|
2009 WL 1886628 (Ohio)
Parents filed suit alleging Planned Parenthood performed an illegal abortion on their 14-year-old daughter. The parents alleged Planned Parenthood failed to obtain their consent, failed to obtain their daughter’s informed consent, and breached a duty to report suspected child abuse. The daughter had a relationship with a 21-year-old soccer coach. The 21-year-old pretended to be the girl’s father and authorized the abortion procedure by phone. In addition to their own daughter’s medical records, the parents sought to compel discovery of reports of abuse and medical records of non-party minors who had been patients at Planned Parenthood during a ten year period.
The trial court granted the plaintiffs’ motion to compel discovery, finding the plaintiffs’ interest in the information outweighed the non-party patients’ confidentiality rights, and ordered patient-identifying information redacted from the medical records. The court of appeals reversed. The Supreme Court of Ohio allowed appeal.
NCYL and ten others joined in an amicus brief dated June 16, 2008, in support of the defendants, Planned Parenthood of Southwest Ohio Region. Amici urged the Ohio Supreme Court to reject the request of plaintiffs to review the medical records of non-party minor patients. Disclosure of records would violate confidentiality of physician-patient communications. Minor patients have a federal constitutional right to privacy, which protects the minor’s interest in keeping medical information private, as well as the minor’s right to make decisions affecting procreation independently. If minor patients are not assured confidentiality, they would delay treatment or avoid disclosing important facts to providers, leading to serious negative health consequences. Privacy is especially important for minors who are victims of abuse or in an abusive dating relationship.
The Ohio Supreme Court affirmed the judgment of the appeals court, and held that the abuse reports concerning non-party minors were confidential and not discoverable. Further, the medical records of non-party minors were confidential, and not subject to disclosure. Redaction of identifying information would not change the privileged status of these confidential records.
Counsel: Jeffrey M. Gamso, Carrie L. Davis, ACLU of Ohio, Max Wohl Civil Liberties Center; Corinne Schiff, Talcott Camp, ACLU Foundation, Inc.
Updated April 21, 2010
|
 | |
|
