Originally Posted by
alhcfp
Regulation is really irrelevant to the handling of medical records.
Insurance contracts state that you have to sign release forms and cooperate. If you don't (and you are not required to) the claim is denied, but your privacy remains intact.
What I think, is there may be a note in the record that the MD does not want insurer to see. (mere spec)
OP- You would have this with any company. Insurance companies attempt to avoid paying claims. END OF STORY!!
No...I get that insurance companies will fight you no matter what. I guess I'm saying that I'd probably be willing to sign a release form and play ball when I've bought a product from a reputable firm regulated in my state. If I buy life insurance from Prudential and have to turn over medical data to get it, I'm *more* comfortable with that. (Still never really comfortable with it, but I realize it's a required part of the drill.)
To me, that's different than turning over data to some outfit that could do anything with it. How do I know that my privacy is intact? How do I know they have only licensed M.D.'s looking at my data? Even if I'm in a domicile that has good laws regulating how insurance companies handle data, how do I even know those laws apply to the travel insurance firms when "travel insurance" doesn't seem to be quite the same (legally) as life insurance, health insurance, etc.?
I've read (probably here on FT) that some European countries have very detailed law regarding travel insurance products, including as it applies to their citizens traveling globally. I want to say the UK is held up as a good example but I'm not 100% sure. Perhaps if I lived there I'd be less skeptical about these companies.