Magnum I have worked in a hospital for a couple of years, and I can tell you that you are not supposed to do so, because of doctor patient confidentiality. Insurance companies do have access to Medical Files however, and they can access them if they go through the proper channels...
Now there is a new law that may/already has passed that a hospital can notify police of any drug use, drinking under age, etc. Otherwise the doctor should not be notifying the DMV of anything. I believe the doctor can be sued for that, and probably lose his license to practice, since he is violating HIIPA guidelines.
Wrong bro. This article talking about the law that obligates the Dr to notify the DMV.
HARRISBURG, Pa. - A judge ruled the state can suspend the driver's license of a man who told his doctor he drank a six-pack of beer a day, but also ruled he can obtain restricted driving privileges if he uses an ignition-interlock device in his car.
Keith Emerich said Tuesday he was "kind of stunned" by the ignition-interlock order, but had not decided whether he would appeal the Lebanon County judge's ruling. Emerich, 44, said his legal battle to reclaim his license has left him "just about tapped out" financially.
"I'm being treated like a criminal. The only crime I committed was getting sick and telling the doctor the truth," he said.
Emerich's lawyer said the ruling doesn't answer the question of how Emerich can ultimately prove to the Pennsylvania Department of Transportation that he can drive safely.
"This is going to cost him $30 a month" to rent the ignition-interlock device, said attorney Horace Ehrgood. "I don't know how it solves the issue of his getting his license back until he convinces PennDOT that he's capable of driving."
Ignition-interlock devices, installed in the cars of repeat DUI offenders, force drivers to blow into a tube so their blood alcohol content can be measured. In Pennsylvania, if the driver's BAC is above .025 percent the car won't start; the legal limit is 0.08 percent.
The ruling by Judge Bradford H. Charles was issued Friday. Both sides said they received it late Monday.
Emerich, who lives in Lebanon, about 30 miles east of Harrisburg, received a notice from the department in April that his license was being recalled effective May 6 for medical reasons related to substance abuse.
He disclosed his drinking habit in February to doctors treating him at a hospital for an irregular heartbeat. A state law dating back to the 1960s requires doctors to report any physical or mental impairments in patients that could compromise their ability to drive safely.
Emerich has said he doesn't drive drunk. He contended in a petition to get his license back that he has since restricted his beer-drinking to weekends and that he has a mostly clean driving record, aside from a drunken-driving conviction when he was 21.
But Charles' ruling noted that while Emerich told his doctors that he only drinks beer at home, he testified during a July 29 hearing that he also drank in bars and admitted to driving after having "a few beers." Emerich also refused a doctor's request to seek alcoholism counseling or therapy, Charles said.
"We find that the abyss of Emerich's alcoholism was so cavernous that he would and/or could not moderate his alcohol consumption so that he could safely drive," Charles wrote.
Charles said he was ordering Emerich to obtain an ignition-interlock device because an indefinite license suspension would be unfair, given his more recent efforts to reduce his beer consumption.
Although the state's ignition-interlock law is designed to address cases in which motorists drive drunk or refuse to take blood-alcohol tests, it does not expressly prohibit the use of the device for motorists with medically restricted licenses, Charles said.
"An interlock device will ensure that Emerich does not drive under the influence of alcohol," Charles wrote.
PennDOT spokesman Anthony Haubert said the department was pleased that the license suspension was upheld, and that it would comply with Charles' ruling.