plaws said:
Depends on how a service's lawyers interpret
HIPAA.
As a journalist, I deal with HIPAA every day. HIPAA (Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act) was created so that people could keep their health insurance when they change jobs. The privacy part of the law was an after-thought. Sometimes, providers think that HIPAA is there to protect them. Not so. It's there to protect the patient.
Just yesterday, OCPD Chief Citty happened to be at the station, and we had a few minutes by ourselves to speak. Our topic was HIPAA. He told me that he had to set up meetings with hospitals here in OKC to be able to get patient information, because hospitals thought that they could keep any and all information from anyone else, at their discretion.
EMSA is a "covered" entity, meaning that they must comply with HIPAA, but the rules are very simple, and the idea that they need to encrypt dispatches is far above and beyond what the law requires.
Protected Health Information is
individually identifiable health information created, received, transmitted and/or maintained by a covered entity.
A good resource, if you'd like to read up on HIPAA yourself, is the Association of Health Care Journalists website, at
http://www.healthjournalism.org/conf/2006/hipaa_info.htm. It's where I copied that last sentence.
Bottom line, there's no legal reason to encrypt dispatch transmissions, except to protect EMSA. It's certainly not to protect the patients.