States across the country maintain prescription drug monitoring programs, which contained data about prescriptions for controlled substances and supports state's efforts to combat prescription drug abuse. In light of the opioid crisis and the increasing number of deaths across the country from opiate to opioid abuse, states are struggling with the question of how much accent access law enforcement officials
should have to these databases. New Jersey is currently considering a bill that would allow police and process prosecutors to access its database without a core order, but Governor Chris Christie opposes the bill. Here to talk with us about it and the issue more generally is Robert Mints, a partner at um at Carter and English Bob, Can you describe for us what is in these databases and why states have them? Uh? Sure, Michael, Um. The information that
are in these databases is really quite extensive. It would it requires. It contains information on every prescription for a controlled substance that is dispensed by pharmacies in the state. So that can include everything from highly addictive prescription opioids such as vigodin and OxyContin to stimulants such as Adderall can It includes anti anxiety drugs, also common pain killers, and costs of presence with cody, and these are things
that are all subject to becoming addictive narcotics. But at the same time, as you can see, it covers a very broad spectrum of potential health issues. Bob. But we've often talked about court cases getting warrants for cell phones. Here it is the most personal of a person's records, their medical records, and for things they might not want people to know. Why not have to get a warrant
for this? Well, that's a good point, and you find that even state medical boards and medical societies, uh surprisingly are coming down on the side of privacy advocates because there is some concern that if individuals know that prescription drugs that they may be taking for all the host of issues that I just mentioned, if that information is going to be readily available to law enforcement without even a judge taking a look at it and determining whether
there's probable cause, that that may drive those individuals underground and away from the medical care that they need. So surprisingly, it's the doctors themselves who are objecting to this and who are saying that we want to make sure that the relationship between doctor, between patients and doctors is not in any way tampered with, and we don't want to take patients and drive them away from dealing with doctors who are in the best position to help these individuals
with their addictions. Well, on the other side, there are legislators and prosecutors who think that the police and prosecutors should be able to get access to this information very readily. What's the argument from them, Well, the argument from them is that there is an epidemic out there. There's no question about that. Death from opioid drugs top thirty thousand in which was nearly double the rate from a decade ago.
And it's very easy in many states for individuals to go doctor shopping, in other words, walk down the street and get the same prescription from multiple physicians, and the physician who maybe the third in line, will prescribe an opioid having no knowledge that two other doctors have previously prescribed the same drugs, and the person then can get triple the dose that there that they ought to be
actually taking. Bob. In California, the Supreme courts the state Supreme Court rule recently that the state Medical Board can dig through those prescription drug records without a warrant or a subpoena. What's the weighing process to be used to determine whether or not a subpoena or a warrant is required. Well, I think it depends June to some extent on who's gaining access. In some states, the Medical Board can have
that access. In Missouri, for example, there's a new state law or an executive order I should say that gives the state Department of Health the information. Um, But this is this law in New Jersey is taking one step further saying that law enforcement can itself gather this information without a warrant, and that is what has some privacy
advocates concerned about it. In about a minute, we have left The New York Times reporting today about prosecutors charging drug dealers who are selling up yards with the death of people who have used them. What's the theory there that prosecutors would follow. Well, there's two things going on here. There is a concern about individuals who are addicted, and
that's what these UH databases are designed to protect. But there's also situations where doctors and pharmacists are actively supplying people and these prosecutions are unique because they are actually going after doctors who are knowingly providing pain killers to people who they know to be addicts, and prosecutors are trying to tie them in in a criminal case on
saying that they're criminally responsible for these deaths. Well our thanks to Bob Mints, a partner at mcarter and English, for being here to talk about the balance between privacy and law enforcement needs to know about prescription drug abuse.