Fischer Constance T
Department of Psychology, Duquesne University, Pittsburgh, PA 15282, USA.
J Pers Assess. 2004 Feb;82(1):35-8; discussion 44-7. doi: 10.1207/s15327752jpa8201_6.
In this comment, I express appreciation of Erard's (this issue) review, and urge psychologists to continue to protect test security. I disagree with Erard's belief that the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (HIPAA) is salient for nonhealth forensic issues. I then review some ways in which individualized assessment practices can moderate the negative impact of the HIPPA privacy rules. Assessors can use tests as a ground forjoint exploration of the client's experience, behavior, and their contexts. Clients may later ask for a review of test data and collaborative life findings, but they rarely are interested in acquiring test records. Attorneys, after discovering that assessment conclusions are based largely on events/contexts provided by the client and others, are less interested in acquiring test records that the psychologist used as tools rather than as evidence for conclusions.
在本评论中，我对埃拉尔（本期）的综述表示赞赏，并敦促心理学家继续保护测试安全。我不同意埃拉尔的观点，即1996年的《健康保险流通与责任法案》（HIPAA）对非健康领域的法医问题具有重要意义。然后，我将探讨一些个性化评估实践可以减轻HIPPA隐私规则负面影响的方法。评估人员可以将测试作为共同探究客户经历、行为及其背景的基础。客户之后可能会要求审查测试数据和共同得出的生活结论，但他们很少有兴趣获取测试记录。律师在发现评估结论很大程度上基于客户和其他人提供的事件/背景后，对获取心理学家用作工具而非结论证据的测试记录的兴趣就会降低。
