McLaughlin writes: "If you're relying on the public health care system,
you're living your life under surveillance, says Khiara Bridges, a law
professor and anthropology researcher at the Boston University School of
Law."
Pregnant woman's silhouette. (photo: Daniel Berehulak/Getty)
Pregnant, on Medicaid, and Being Watched
By Jenna McLaughlin, The Intercept
08 April 16
If you're relying on the public health care system, you're living your life
under surveillance, says Khiara Bridges, a law professor and anthropology
researcher at the Boston University School of Law.
All sorts of incredibly invasive details about your life, including sexual
experience, eating habits, and job history, are stored in databases that are
accessible not only to your caregivers, but potentially to law enforcement,
too, she says.
Bridges will be discussing her research on the routine and invasive
monitoring of women who require certain public health care assistance on
Friday at a Georgetown Law School conference titled "The Color of
Surveillance: Government Monitoring of the Black Community."
Her first book, Reproducing Race, featured four women at a New York City
public hospital whom she followed from May 2006 to September 2007. These
women were enrolled in the Prenatal Care Assistance Program, which serves
uninsured and underinsured women, including undocumented immigrant women.
The women start by going through what she calls "information canvassing" in
order to enroll - answering questions on topics "from sexual abuse, to
intimate partner violence, to how often they ate, what they ate, how they
make their money, how their partner makes their money."
They are then required by law to speak with nurses, health educators, HIV
counselors, social workers, financial officers, and others.
"Their lives are just so open to observation and regulation," Bridges says
in a phone interview.
These "case management services" are officially there to provide help in
"gaining access to needed medical, social, educational, and other services."
But Bridges argues that the questions sometimes stray into the unnecessary,
invasive, and non-medical territory. She calls it "a gross and substantial
intrusion by the government into poor, pregnant women's private lives."
Bridges says she is publishing a new book next spring called The Poverty of
Privacy Rights - zooming in on just how little privacy the underprivileged
have under systems like Medicaid. She's explored the topic in several law
review articles, including one at Harvard titled "Privacy Rights and Public
Families."
Those who can afford private health care get to pick what they say to whom,
Bridges says. "They don't have to talk about the past if they don't want,"
she explains. They can protect their privacy through their wealth.
Bridges is particularly concerned about exceptions in the law that allow for
incredibly personal information to be shared with law enforcement. As she
writes in a section of her forthcoming book:
Crucially, the Privacy Act contains exceptions that allow for the
nonconsensual disclosure of collected information. Intriguingly, one of
those exceptions "allows disclosure to other jurisdictions for law
enforcement." The result of this exception is that when a population is
imagined to be inclined toward criminality, then that population exists in a
state of exception under the Privacy Act: Its information can be disclosed
as long as it is for law enforcement purposes. .
. Undeniably, welfare beneficiaries are one of those populations that are
thought to be comprised of criminal elements. The irony should be apparent:
The act that provides protection from the disclosure of information, and
thereby saves the constitutionality of information-collecting regimes,
itself provides for disclosure.
Other researchers and groups, such as the Stop LAPD Spying Coalition, are
concerned about the surveillance of people who enroll in Electronic Benefit
Transfer programs to buy groceries, or take advantage of other public
benefits.
The monitoring of people who need public assistance has long been an issue
with feminist thinkers and other legal scholars.
Maria Cristina Rangel, a feminist activist and mother who relied on the
public benefits system, wrote in a 2001 book:
The whole system is based on the assumption that you are trying to screw
[welfare officials] over. There are constant check-ins and impossibly long
lists of "verifications" to submit to the state in order to back your story;
inquisitions involving a battery of questions asked by countless supervisors
behind closed doors when it appears that your story does not add up . [and]
if you don't comply . your benefits can be cut.
Bridges remains focused on everyday public health care monitoring. And, she
says, "The least scrutinized program is Medicaid."
Error! Hyperlink reference not valid. Error! Hyperlink reference not valid.
Pregnant woman's silhouette. (photo: Daniel Berehulak/Getty)
https://theintercept.com/2016/04/07/pregnant-on-medicaid-and-being-watched/h
ttps://theintercept.com/2016/04/07/pregnant-on-medicaid-and-being-watched/
Pregnant, on Medicaid, and Being Watched
By Jenna McLaughlin, The Intercept
08 April 16
f you're relying on the public health care system, you're living your life
under surveillance, says Khiara Bridges, a law professor and anthropology
researcher at the Boston University School of Law.
All sorts of incredibly invasive details about your life, including sexual
experience, eating habits, and job history, are stored in databases that are
accessible not only to your caregivers, but potentially to law enforcement,
too, she says.
Bridges will be discussing her research on the routine and invasive
monitoring of women who require certain public health care assistance on
Friday at a Georgetown Law School conference titled "The Color of
Surveillance: Government Monitoring of the Black Community."
Her first book, Reproducing Race, featured four women at a New York City
public hospital whom she followed from May 2006 to September 2007. These
women were enrolled in the Prenatal Care Assistance Program, which serves
uninsured and underinsured women, including undocumented immigrant women.
The women start by going through what she calls "information canvassing" in
order to enroll - answering questions on topics "from sexual abuse, to
intimate partner violence, to how often they ate, what they ate, how they
make their money, how their partner makes their money."
They are then required by law to speak with nurses, health educators, HIV
counselors, social workers, financial officers, and others.
"Their lives are just so open to observation and regulation," Bridges says
in a phone interview.
These "case management services" are officially there to provide help in
"gaining access to needed medical, social, educational, and other services."
But Bridges argues that the questions sometimes stray into the unnecessary,
invasive, and non-medical territory. She calls it "a gross and substantial
intrusion by the government into poor, pregnant women's private lives."
Bridges says she is publishing a new book next spring called The Poverty of
Privacy Rights - zooming in on just how little privacy the underprivileged
have under systems like Medicaid. She's explored the topic in several law
review articles, including one at Harvard titled "Privacy Rights and Public
Families."
Those who can afford private health care get to pick what they say to whom,
Bridges says. "They don't have to talk about the past if they don't want,"
she explains. They can protect their privacy through their wealth.
Bridges is particularly concerned about exceptions in the law that allow for
incredibly personal information to be shared with law enforcement. As she
writes in a section of her forthcoming book:
Crucially, the Privacy Act contains exceptions that allow for the
nonconsensual disclosure of collected information. Intriguingly, one of
those exceptions "allows disclosure to other jurisdictions for law
enforcement." The result of this exception is that when a population is
imagined to be inclined toward criminality, then that population exists in a
state of exception under the Privacy Act: Its information can be disclosed
as long as it is for law enforcement purposes. .
. Undeniably, welfare beneficiaries are one of those populations that are
thought to be comprised of criminal elements. The irony should be apparent:
The act that provides protection from the disclosure of information, and
thereby saves the constitutionality of information-collecting regimes,
itself provides for disclosure.
Other researchers and groups, such as the Stop LAPD Spying Coalition, are
concerned about the surveillance of people who enroll in Electronic Benefit
Transfer programs to buy groceries, or take advantage of other public
benefits.
The monitoring of people who need public assistance has long been an issue
with feminist thinkers and other legal scholars.
Maria Cristina Rangel, a feminist activist and mother who relied on the
public benefits system, wrote in a 2001 book:
The whole system is based on the assumption that you are trying to screw
[welfare officials] over. There are constant check-ins and impossibly long
lists of "verifications" to submit to the state in order to back your story;
inquisitions involving a battery of questions asked by countless supervisors
behind closed doors when it appears that your story does not add up . [and]
if you don't comply . your benefits can be cut.
Bridges remains focused on everyday public health care monitoring. And, she
says, "The least scrutinized program is Medicaid."
http://e-max.it/posizionamento-siti-web/socialize
http://e-max.it/posizionamento-siti-web/socialize
