Take-Aways (AI)
  • The Fede­ral Coun­cil and the FOPH do not curr­ent­ly see any syste­ma­tic brea­ches of data pro­tec­tion by health insu­r­ers or medi­cal con­sul­tants; await eva­lua­ti­on of the obli­ga­ti­on to report psy­cho­the­ra­py from June 2007.
  • The FOPH has alre­a­dy taken mea­su­res in indi­vi­du­al cases; a gene­ral sus­pen­si­on of the report­ing pro­ce­du­re is curr­ent­ly not con­side­red necessary.

Moti­on Bru­de­rer (07.3247): Data pro­tec­tion in health insu­rance companies
Tran­script (03÷20÷2009).

Sub­mit­ted text

The Fede­ral Coun­cil is ins­truc­ted to take appro­pria­te mea­su­res to ensu­re data pro­tec­tion bet­ween the medi­cal exami­ners and the admi­ni­stra­ti­ve staff of the health insu­rance funds and, in par­ti­cu­lar, to ensu­re that, within the frame­work of the noti­fi­ca­ti­on pro­ce­du­re for the remu­ne­ra­ti­on of psy­cho­the­ra­py, medi­cal data are only for­ward­ed to the admi­ni­stra­ti­on of the health insu­rance fund in the excep­tio­nal cases pro­vi­ded for by law.

Justi­fi­ca­ti­on

Accor­ding to a report in the “Tages-Anzei­ger” of March 19, 2007, many health insu­r­ers are too lax in pro­tec­ting high­ly sen­si­ti­ve pati­ent data. At CSS in par­ti­cu­lar, the­re are appar­ent­ly known cases of high­ly sen­si­ti­ve pati­ent data being ente­red into an elec­tro­nic system to which hundreds of employees have access. The dis­re­gard of the data pro­tec­tion pro­vi­ded for by law leads to a serious vio­la­ti­on of the per­so­nal rights of the insured.

The neglec­ted pro­tec­tion of sen­si­ti­ve pati­ent data is par­ti­cu­lar­ly worry­ing in con­nec­tion with the intro­duc­tion of man­da­to­ry report­ing for psy­cho­the­ra­py at the begin­ning of this year. As a result of the report­ing pro­ce­du­re, medi­cal exami­ners are infor­med of tens of thou­sands of cases of psych­ia­tric dia­gno­ses of insu­red per­sons every year. Insu­red per­sons can only be expec­ted to make such a report if data pro­tec­tion bet­ween medi­cal offi­cers and the health insu­rance fund admi­ni­stra­ti­on is strict­ly observed.

Per­so­nal rights must be safe­guard­ed. The Fede­ral Coun­cil is the­r­e­fo­re cal­led upon to take mea­su­res: eit­her the report­ing pro­ce­du­re should be gene­ral­ly sus­pen­ded until the health insu­r­ers are in a posi­ti­on to gua­ran­tee data pro­tec­tion. Alter­na­tively, the report­ing pro­ce­du­re should only be used by tho­se health insu­r­ers who can pro­ve that they gua­ran­tee data pro­tec­tion. The Fede­ral Office of Public Health publishes a list of health insu­r­ers that have not pro­vi­ded this proof.

<

h1>Statement of the Fede­ral Council

<

h1>

06.3040 set out in detail. In addi­ti­on, it also sup­ports the Fede­ral Data Pro­tec­tion and Infor­ma­ti­on Com­mis­sio­ner in its super­vi­so­ry activities.

The motion’s pro­po­sal to sus­pend the noti­fi­ca­ti­on pro­ce­du­re for psy­cho­the­ra­py for data pro­tec­tion rea­sons assu­mes that insu­r­ers and medi­cal exami­ners are gene­ral­ly not ful­fil­ling their respon­si­bi­li­ty to safe­guard the per­so­nal rights of insu­red per­sons. Howe­ver, the report­ing pro­ce­du­re has only been in place sin­ce the begin­ning of 2007. Start­ing in June 2007, an eva­lua­ti­on of the imple­men­ta­ti­on and enforce­ment of the new pro­vi­si­ons will take place, which will also exami­ne, among other things, exi­sting data pro­tec­tion issues among tho­se affec­ted. The result of the eva­lua­ti­on must be awai­ted befo­re any mea­su­res can be taken.

In its super­vi­so­ry acti­vi­ties, the Fede­ral Office of Public Health (FOPH) has not yet recei­ved any indi­ca­ti­ons or evi­dence that insu­r­ers and medi­cal exami­ners would fun­da­men­tal­ly and per­ma­nent­ly fail to ful­fill their legal data pro­tec­tion obli­ga­ti­ons. Howe­ver, it must be con­ce­ded that in indi­vi­du­al cases, unlawful actions have been suspec­ted. In the event of such sus­pi­ci­ons, the FOPH has taken the appro­pria­te mea­su­res, inclu­ding in par­ti­cu­lar with the insurer men­tio­ned in the motion.

The super­vi­so­ry means available to the FOPH also ful­fill their pur­po­se for the noti­fi­ca­ti­on pro­ce­du­re for psy­cho­the­ra­py. The Fede­ral Coun­cil does not con­sider fur­ther mea­su­res to be neces­sa­ry at present.