Medical identity theft is stealing health information for personal profit. If that sounds like a strange thing to do, it is-but it is more common than generally thought. What is known about it remains sketchy because it is the most poorly documented of all identity theft crimes, according to data from the Federal Trade Commission (FTC), which estimates that there are 250,000 to 500,000 victims, but the real number is probably triple that.
Explore This IssueMay 2007
The FTC speculates that 1.5% of all Americans are victims of medical identity theft each year, and the crime increased almost 200% between 2001 and 2005.
Kurt Long, CEO of EpicTide, a company in St. Petersburg, FL, that markets corporate security, said that there are probably a half million victims to date, a number that will probably increase now to 250,000 each year.
Here’s how it works: A thief uses a victim’s name and/or other identifying information without the person’s knowledge or consent to obtain medical services. Or, the thief uses the stolen data to make false claims for medical services. The victim, or the insurance company, is billed for services not received. Even more frightening, the victim can end up with false information entered on his or her medical record, or an entirely new fictitious medical record can be created.
It can be notoriously difficult to uncover, according to a report issued last May by the World Privacy Forum (WPF), a nonprofit, public-interest research group in Cardiff, CA, that describes itself as focusing in a nonpartisan way on research and consumer education in the intersecting areas of technology and a range of privacy matters, including financial, medical, employment, and Internet privacy.
Medical identity is well hidden in large electronic payment systems and in widely dispersed databases and medical files, the report, titled Medical Identity Theft: The Information Crime that Can Kill You, noted. Medical identity thieves are usually professionals adept at making sure victims do not detect the crime-ever.
Organized crime rings are heavily involved, almost always in collusion with health care employees such as office and medical records personnel and insurance claims clerks. These rings are very organized and highly sophisticated, and they depend heavily on insiders, said Pam Dixon, the organization’s executive director and the author of the report.
The four most vulnerable types of patients are those with cancer, diabetes, and AIDS, and residents of inpatient drug treatment centers.
Occasionally the crime is more innocuous, Ms. Dixon continued. A poor person without health insurance needs medical care and believes the only way to get it is to steal it. Or someone who lifts a wallet at a mall and finds a health insurance card among the other treasures.
How Victims Are Harmed
Victims of medical identity theft learn about the crime in various ways: through a collection notice for bills they did not incur, an erroneous entry on a credit report, denial of insurance or notification that a payout cap has been reached, or irregularities in health insurance explanation of benefits (which most people don’t bother to read or can’t understand).
In addition, they may be denied employment because someone else’s illness is on their record, or receive the wrong medical treatment because of erroneous information in their own file-a situation that is particularly dangerous in the emergency department.
Imagine a bleeding patient given a transfusion of the wrong type blood. Or someone with a hot gallbladder told he had it removed two years ago. Or a cancer patient’s file that has someone else’s PET scan. Or erased data about a previous anaphylactic reaction to penicillin.
And what if the thief has died, but the victim is still alive and needs medical care? Think about walking into a doctor’s office (or worse, the ER) and being informed that you’re dead.
Use of stolen medical information is rarely a one-shot deal. The FTC says that it is often misused for a substantial period of time. Thirteen percent of victims report misuse for six months or more.
Victims Almost Powerless
Victims of medical identity theft cannot escape the consequences because they have no enforceable rights, Ms. Dixon noted. Patients can see their medical records (usually after asking more than once and having to pay for a photocopy), but they cannot correct errors, and the theft may not even be evident in the record.
Moreover, they are powerless to prevent providers, clearinghouses, and insurers from perpetuating the fraudulent information.
Ms. Dixon said that victims do not have the legal right to demand correction of medical information that was not created by the provider or insurer currently using it-even when false entries were put in the record during the commission of a crime.
Health care providers are not required to amend records they didn’t create, and they are reluctant to do so voluntarily for fear of liability. So victims of medical identity theft can spend years running from doctor to doctor, to insurance company, to laboratory, to pharmacy trying to get things straightened out. In the end, mistakes keep slipping by.
Nightmarish is the word one hears most often in connection with medical identity theft, Ms. Dixon said. Because there are no laws, there is no one to call for help. The crime should be reported to local police, but that is usually futile, and if the victim notifies anyone else, he or she may be reporting the crime to the same people who committed it.
One of the big problems, according to the WPF report, is that victims fall through law enforcement gaps-chasms, really-because no one agency knows how to help.
For example, financial identity theft experts know little about medical affairs or the complexities of the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA). The FTC is not responsible for medical issues, and the federal Department of Health and Human Services has no published studies or guidance about medical identity theft, which is not the same as health care fraud.
Mr. Long called health care organizations particularly vulnerable, saying that some employees are induced to provide rosters of patient names to crime rings. Moreover, partly because of HIPAA as well as other circumstances, the thieves get away with it because there are no big fines, no jail time, and no enforcement of the existing weak regulations, he said.
Medical identity theft is relatively easy to commit now-and it will become easier as paper-based records are changed to electronic ones via the National Health Information Network and disseminated to huge numbers of people who may or may not have legitimate access to them.
Current policy maintains that digitizing medical records will improve care, reduce fraud and errors, and save lives. This can be true, but committing private and sensitive data to cyberspace is an open invitation to steal, Ms. Dixon maintained.
The more digitized the health care system becomes-and there’s no stopping now-the greater the problem of medical identity theft. There’s too much cheerleading about electronic records on the part of government administrators, insurance companies, and others, and not nearly enough emphasis on its downside: what it does to patients whose data are stolen. I don’t know of any electronic program that has had risk- assessment studies prior to implementation.
Ms. Dixon said that she is not opposed to electronic records- although paper does protect people-but if there was a risk-management process in place, things might be okay. Making the system hack-proof is a daunting task, but it must be done.
Little Recourse-So Far
The WPF report notes that identity theft is deeply entrenched in the health care system, and that victims ought to have recourse in the form of a right to correct errors, remove false information, and receive one free copy of their medical record each year. Patients also should be informed of breaches in their records as soon as they occur.
The report recommended that:
- Studies be conducted to determine the incidence and nature of the crime in order to prevent and counteract it.
- Patients have expanded rights to their own health information in its various medical and financial forms.
- Patients should be informed about errors and allowed to correct them-in all iterations of the record.
- When patients have been victimized, they should have adequate legal and monetary recourse-equal at least to the protections offered to victims of financial identity theft.
In addition, public and private health insurers should send each beneficiary a free annual listing of all paid claims.
Mr. Long agreed: We need to devise a multiplicity of solutions: physical security of medical data, photo ID at the point where care is provided, and automated auditing of medical records.
He noted that some doctor’s offices, hospitals, and HMOs have begun to ask patients for identification such as a drivers license or Social Security number. Still, considering how easy it is to buy a fake license, this isn’t much extra protection.
Until there are strong laws, accompanied by strong enforcement and effective technology, Mr. Long said, things are unlikely to improve.
Medical Identity Theft Survey
A survey commissioned by Kurt Long’s company, EpicTide, conducted in November 2006, revealed that, despite increasing media reports, the public has little appreciation of how widespread and dangerous medical identity theft is.
The survey sought to find out if consumers are aware of the phenomenon, what the incidence is, how well they understand their rights before and after they have been victimized, and how well the health care system protects their records and ensures their safety.
Among the findings:
- Nearly half of respondents had never heard of medical identity theft and were mostly unaware of its serious consequences.
- But when the consequences were described, consumers’ top three fears were the risk to life and health, loss of privacy and confidentiality, and changes in their medical records.
- Several respondents had been victimized, and the majority had yet to resolve all the ensuing problems.
- Most victims did not know the perpetrator, but 18% of them had been victimized by a family member.
- Consumers are confused about privacy rights, and only 53% had been asked to sign a HIPAA notice at the point of medical service (most didn’t read it).
- Respondents believe almost unanimously that health care providers and organizations are responsible for protecting their medical privacy, but only 40% think that this is being done.
- Even fewer-only 30%-believe that hospitals inform potential victims of suspected breaches of medical record security.
©2007 The Triological Society