There are now 234 pregnant women in the US with confirmed Zika virus

Re:There are now 234 pregnant women in the US with confirmed... by srtjstjsj on Saturday June 18, 2016 @10:40PM (#11931584)

> "We’re sort of in a hard place," Jamieson told The New York Times. "We can’t provide a lot of information about where these women are in their pregnancy. We don’t want to inadvertently disclose information about difficult decisions these women are making about their pregnancies."

Is there a point where the impending public health crisis becomes more important than patient privacy?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:There are now 234 pregnant women in the US with confirmed... by warmwaffles on Saturday June 18, 2016 @10:49PM (#11931597)

Yes, because you can not make one exception otherwise it will be used all the time to circumvent patient doctor privilege. The old saying, "give them an inch and they take a mile" is exactly this case.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:There are now 234 pregnant women in the US with confirmed... by srtjstjsj on Tuesday June 21, 2016 @01:04PM (#11947273)

Of course you can make one exception. That's why it's called an exception. The law is chock-full of exceptions, often carefully written to delineate their scope.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:There are now 234 pregnant women in the US with confirmed... by warmwaffles on Thursday June 23, 2016 @10:15AM (#11960977)

That is a terrible justification and sets a bad precedence

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:There are now 234 pregnant women in the US with confirmed... by paulddraper on Sunday June 19, 2016 @01:39AM (#11931921)

"a lot of information"

Well, safe on that count. The only identifying info they've provided is that they are female and pregnant.

[ Parent | on HN ]