Open Records Decision No. 546
March 21, 1990

	Re:  Consent to release of medical records under section 5.08 of article 4495b, 
V.T.C.S.  (RQ-1921)

Honorable Mike Driscoll
Harris County Attorney
1001 Preston, Suite 634
Houston, Texas  77002

Dear Mr. Driscoll:

	An open records request, pursuant to the Texas Open Records Act, V.T.C.S. art. 
6252-17a, was directed to the Harris County Hospital District asking for medical records 
of a certain patient "to indicate his diagnosis and what sorts of treatment he required 
during his October 1989 hospital stays."

	Accompanying the request was a consent for the release of medical records.  This 
consent was signed and recited, in pertinent part, "I agree to allow Stephen Johnson with 
the Houston Chronicle to have copies of any and all medical records of mine."

	You assert that the requested information is excepted from public disclosure by 
section 3(a)(1) of the Open Records Act, which exempts from public disclosure 
information deemed confidential by law, and cite section 5.08 of the Medical Practice 
Act.  V.T.C.S. art. 4495b.

	We agree that the requested information is excepted from public disclosure by the 
Medical Practice Act.  The applicability of the Medical Practice Act depends upon 
whether the records in question come within the language of subsections (a) and (b) of 
section 5.08 of that act.  Hospital treatment is routinely conducted under the supervision 
of physicians.  Since the file is the result of a hospital stay, all the documents relating to 
diagnosis and treatment would constitute physician-patient communications or "[r]ecords 
of the identity, diagnosis, evaluation, or treatment of a patient by a physician that are 
created or maintained by a physician."  Such records are confidential pursuant to section 
5.08 of the Medical Practice Act, V.T.C.S. art. 4495b, and are, thus, "deemed 
confidential" by statutory law.

	You further assert that the consent accompanying the request is insufficient to 
overcome the confidentiality of the requested information.

	Section 5.08 of the Medical Practice Act provides, in part:

	(h)  Exceptions to the privilege of confidentiality, in other than 
court or administrative proceedings, allowing disclosure of 
confidential information by a physician, exist only to the following:

	(5)  any person who bears a written consent of the patient or 
other person authorized to act on the patient's behalf for the release 
of confidential information, as provided by Subsection (j) of this 
section;

. . . .

	(j)(1)  Consent for the release of confidential information must 
be in writing and signed by the patient . . . provided that the written 
consent specifies the following:

	(A)  the information or medical records to be covered by the 
release;

	(B)  the reasons or purposes for the release; and

	(C)  the person to whom the information is to be released. . . .

	(3)  Any person who receives information made confidential by 
this Act may disclose the information to others only to the extent 
consistent with the authorized purposes for which consent to release 
the information was obtained.

	Section 5.08(j)(1) of the Medical Practice Act sets forth a detailed set of 
requirements for consent to the release of information.  However, the patient's signed, 
written consent in question here satisfies all the requirements of section 5.08(j)(1), except 
that found in section 5.08(j)(1)(B), that the consent must specify the reasons or purposes 
for the release.  You assert that the patient's consent to the release of his records is also 
deficient in that it fails to identify the requested records with sufficient specificity.  
However, nothing in section 5.08 implies that any degree of specificity beyond that 
found in the patient's consent in question here is required.  If the records to which the 
consent is granted are identifiable, they have been described with sufficient specificity.  
The fact that the actual request for records may not include all those to which consent for 
release has been granted is immaterial.  Nevertheless, as it does not specify the reasons or 
purposes for the release of the information, the patient's consent is not in compliance 
with section 5.08(j) of the Medical Practice Act.  In the absence of a valid consent for its 
release, all information protected from public disclosure by section 5.08 of the Medical 
Practice Act must be withheld.

SUMMARY

	A consent for the release of information is not in compliance 
with section 5.08(j) of the Medical Practice Act unless it specifies 
the reasons or purposes for the release of the information.  If the 
records to which the consent is granted are identifiable, they have 
been described with sufficient specificity.

Very truly yours,

Jim Mattox
Attorney General of Texas

Mary Keller
First Assistant Attorney General

Judge Zollie Steakley
Special Assistant Attorney General

Renea Hicks
Special Assistant Attorney General

Rick Gilpin
Chairman, Opinion Committee

Prepared by

John Steiner
Assistant Attorney General