Resources

Client Alerts, News Articles, Blog Posts, & Multimedia

Everything you need to know about BMD and the industry.

Enhancing Privacy Protections for Substance Use Disorder Patient Records

Client Alert

On February 8, 2024, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (“HHS”) finalized updated rules to 42 CFR Part 2 (“Part 2”) for the protection of Substance Use Disorder (“SUD”) patient records. The updated rules reflect the requirement that the Part 2 rules be more closely aligned with the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (“HIPAA”) privacy, breach notification, and enforcement rules as mandated by the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act of 2020.

Part 2 protects the SUD treatment records of patients who are treated at a Part 2 program. Part 2 programs are those that are (1) federally assisted (they receive federal funding) and (2) hold themselves out as providing, and do provide, substance use disorder diagnosis, treatment, or referral for treatment. The final rules released by HHS this month reflect the inclusion of the public comments from providers, trade associations, health information exchanges, health plans and others.

The final rules make the following modifications to Part 2 regulations, effective February 16, 2026:

  • Patient Consent: One single Part 2 consent will be sufficient for all future disclosures for payment, treatment, and health care operations. All disclosures made with patient consent must include a copy of the consent or a clear explanation of the scope of consent. Previously, a separate consent was needed for each disclosure of Part 2 information. However, the final rules do retain a prohibition on the use of Part 2 records in legal proceedings and testimony in civil, criminal, administrative, and legislative proceedings against a patient without specific consent or a court order.
  • Counseling Notes: Like HIPAA psychotherapy records, a separate patient consent for the use and disclosure of SUD counseling notes is now required. SUD counseling notes include those analyzing the conversation in a SUD counseling session that the clinician voluntarily maintains separately from the rest of the patient’s SUD treatment and medical record.
  • Patient Notice: Part 2 patient notice requirements now align with the requirements of the HIPAA Notice of Privacy Practices.
  • Redisclosure: HIPAA covered entities and business associates that receive records under a Part 2 consent may redisclose those records according to HIPAA regulations. Previously, Part 2 regulations required a specific disclosure that was stricter than HIPAA redisclosure regulations.
  • Public Health: Part 2 records may now be disclosed to public health authorities without patient consent as long as the records are de-identified.
  • Breach Notification: The HIPAA Breach Notification Rule requirements will also apply to breaches of records under Part 2.
  • Segregation of Part 2 Data: Part 2 records are no longer required to be segregated or segmented from other medical records.
  • Fundraising: Patients will be able to opt out of receiving fundraising communications from Part 2 programs.
  • Complaints: Patients will have a right to file a complaint directly with the Secretary of HHS for an alleged violation of Part 2 in addition to filing a complaint with the Part 2 program.
  • Penalties: Part 2 penalties will be aligned with HIPAA by replacing criminal penalties currently in Part 2 with civil and criminal enforcement authorities that also apply to HIPAA violations.

The text of the final rule can be found on the Federal Register. All Part 2 programs must comply with the new requirements by February 16, 2026. The BMD healthcare team can help ensure that you are compliant. Please reach out to Daphne Kackloudis (dlkackloudis@bmdllc.com) or Jordan Burdick (jaburdick@bmdllc.com) for questions or assistance.


Corporate Transparency Act Overhauled: U.S. Entities No Longer Required to Report

The Department of Treasury has issued an interim final rule significantly altering the Corporate Transparency Act (CTA). As of March 21, 2025, all U.S.-created entities and their beneficial owners are exempt from reporting requirements. Only non-U.S. entities registered to do business in the U.S. must still report, but they are not required to disclose U.S. citizen owners. Business owners should stay informed on these changes and consult legal counsel for compliance guidance.

ODM to Implement Medicaid Work Requirements: What Providers and Medicaid Expansion Recipients Need to Know

The Ohio Department of Medicaid (ODM) has submitted a waiver to impose work requirements for Medicaid expansion recipients. If approved, the new eligibility criteria will take effect on January 1, 2026. A federal public comment period is open until April 7, 2025.

Ohio Appellate Court Rules in Favor of Gender-Affirming Care

On March 18, 2025, the 10th District Court of Appeals in Franklin County ruled that Ohio’s House Bill (HB) 68, which restricts puberty blockers and hormone therapy for minors seeking gender-affirming care, violates the Health Care Freedom Amendment and is therefore unenforceable. The court found that the law unlawfully interferes with parental rights and medical decision-making. The case, Moe v. Yost, has been remanded, and Ohio Attorney General Dave Yost intends to appeal.

HHS Revokes Public Comment Requirement on Certain Policy Changes

The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) has revoked the Richardson Waiver, eliminating the requirement for public notice and comment on certain policy changes. This decision allows HHS to implement new policies more quickly, potentially affecting healthcare funding rules like Medicaid work requirements. While it speeds up policymaking, it also reduces opportunities for stakeholder input, raising concerns over transparency and unintended consequences for healthcare providers, states, and patients.

Don't Get Caught Dazed and Confused: Another Florida Court Weighs in on Employer Obligations to Accommodate Medical Marijuana Use

A Florida trial court ruled in Giambrone v. Hillsborough County that employers may need to accommodate off-duty medical marijuana use under the Florida Civil Rights Act (FCRA). This contrasts with prior rulings and raises new compliance challenges for employers. With the case on appeal, now is the time to review workplace drug policies.